Paleo Diet: Raw Paleo Diet and Lifestyle Forum
Raw Paleo Diet Forums => Exercise / Bodybuilding => Topic started by: Josh on June 09, 2010, 05:49:41 pm
-
I find it hard to decide how big and strong to get. At the moment I'm fairly lean and do mostly bodyweight stuff.
I'm very tempted to start the weights and get big and strong. Not extreme bodybuilder, just functional strength and a good size. It's got a lot of advantages for life in our society. I can't help thinking it's not natural though and will have some bad effects later on.
It looks like our ancestors were runners first and foremost, fairly strong, but mostly lean and fit.
What are your thoughts?
-
I disagree. Our palaeo ancestors appear to have had far greater functional strength than even modern bodybuilders as the latter are usually muscle-bound and can't do much except pose.
-
yeah, I don't know about the running bit, but I think a reasonable (high but obtainable) expectation for contemporary natural diet is somewhere in between Bruce Lee-type build and leaner MMA types or welterweight boxers. You can get pretty far with body-weight exercises and light weights if you are clever, but it likely won't be enough for serious bulk. I like how you phrase it though - as if its like picking out a suit, I'm temped too :). I'm starting with bigger weights again soon myself.
-
If getting big is one of your goals just go for it and hit the weights. I personally think the whole idea of forcing your body into looking huge is not right. I resonate more with natural movements done in nature. There is something very unnatural about going to a gym and using all these weird machines and devices. I think intense paleo type activity like what you see in these videos is much better for functional strength, awareness, coordination and mental sharpness.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKGF-ErsJiI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKGF-ErsJiI)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m61t3ObnSP0 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m61t3ObnSP0)
-
I disagree. Our palaeo ancestors appear to have had far greater functional strength than even modern bodybuilders as the latter are usually muscle-bound and can't do much except pose.
Fair enough with bodybuilders as they train for physique, but what about someone who really trains for strength with compound movements squats, deadlifts etc?
I find it hard to see what paleo's were lifting that was that heavy, and the persistence hunt vids on youtube show lean strong guys (ok they're not paleo)
Do you have any evidence/reasons for paleo guys being stronger? I'm not disagreeing academically I just want to get an idea for my own training.
I'm temped too Smiley. I'm starting with bigger weights again soon myself.
Thanks for response KD. It's hard to know what to do. I guess MMA physique might be a pretty good guideline.
edit: interesting vids. He is working his legs pretty hard lifting that tree.
-
You won't "get big bro" if you train compound movements with low repetitions. I follow lots of strength training journals across other forums and none of these types gets huge. You get huge if you do useless non-functioning bodybuilding exercises (lots of machine work with ridiculous reps to failure plus creatine, protein and roids). There are very lean guys that can put up ridiculous amounts of weight. Just look at olympic lifters for example. The non-heavyweight guys are the leanest strongest men on the planet. A 5'8 185 pound guy clean and jerking 450+ is an incredible feat of strength for someone at that bodyweight.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOWcrqOSevs
Stop pussyfooting around and lift
-
Fair enough with bodybuilders as they train for physique, but what about someone who really trains for strength with compound movements squats, deadlifts etc?
I find it hard to see what paleo's were lifting that was that heavy, and the persistence hunt vids on youtube show lean strong guys (ok they're not paleo)
Do you have any evidence/reasons for paleo guys being stronger? I'm not disagreeing academically I just want to get an idea for my own training.
Cordain's already mentioned that palaeo humans were superior re physical performance:-
http://chetday.com/cordaininterview.htm
Here's an overview of various palaeo studies, mentioning how palaeo peoples routinely carried heavy loads etc.:-
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2290514/
There was also that trireme experiment where it was shown that ancient athenians were superior to modern athletes in terms of rowing triremes the same distance in a shorter period.
The point is that modern weight-training is essentially useless for genuine strength. That is, all it will do is make one better at lifting artificial weights like dumbbells. Whereas bodyweight training(such as used in ancient times as well) allows one to have far more functional strength and so compete more effectively in combat or real feats of physical endurance.
For my own part, I always remember my father mentioning how, in his youth, he came across a guy whose job involved lifting incredibly heavy sacks every few seconds over an 8-hour working day and simply throwing them into a lorry. When my father tried lifting them, he found it extremely difficult, but the other guy managed to throw those sacks around because he'd spent much of his working life doing just that. Now, this sort of physical activity was the norm for thousands of years for people, for 8-12 hours almost every single day, whereas now, only a very very few modern athletes train as much as that.
Also, one should never assume that modern hunter-gatherer tribes were anything like palaeolithic tribes. For one thing, palaeolithic tribes ate only raw until the last 10% of the palaeolithic era when cooking was invented. Secondly, modern hunter-gatherer tribes are usually limited in their range due to settled civilisation encroaching on them. Plus, palaeolithic tribes went in for vast migration patterns on a constant basis, following the herds of their prey. And, of course, the modern hunter-gatherer tribe involves lots of non-palaeo foods like grains etc.
-
Yep, I've been a gymrat for a big part of my life and it does not provide functional strength at all.
It wasn't until I diversified, started doing more bodyweight exercises (Non traditional ones) and started running and sprinting when I received some useful strength.
-
The point is that modern weight-training is essentially useless for genuine strength. That is, all it will do is make one better at lifting artificial weights like dumbbells. Whereas bodyweight training(such as used in ancient times as well) allows one to have far more functional strength and so compete more effectively in combat or real feats of physical endurance.
This is very wrong. Now that I have offended you I will tell you why these above statements are complete garbage.
The easiest way to see that weight training is indeed useful is to imagine two cloned athletes. One that does skill work and bodyweight training and the other that does skill work with modern weight training. Obviously the one that adds the weight training will be better. Strength simply allows you to be better at what you do. I would be better at killing an animal the stronger I was. Note, I am not saying to avoid training the skill of whatever you are trying to perfect I am saying that at any particular skill level you would be better the stronger you are. Again, looking at two cloned athletes at the same skill level, the one with more strength would be better.
The fact that nearly every single professional athlete has incorporated some kind of strength training routine using free weights, most likely centered around compound lifts with a barbell, should tell you that strength training is enormously helpful for improving the ability to apply skill in a particular sport.
I also am not advocating only strength training as the only means to improve function, but as an addition to a program consisting of other common tasks that help functionality. Flexibility, mobility and prehab issues are also important in achieving functionality.
One anecdote that I'd like to relay is that there is this highland games competitor(they wear the kilts and throw heavy stuff around like logs and hammers competitively) who's log I follow. He actually does not practice any of the events anymore and focuses solely on getting stronger. His strength routine is centered around only squats, deadlifts and push presses and he only lifts a couple times a week. These lifts do not mimic the movements his body goes through when competing in the events yet he continues to improve and is one of the best in the US. This again should give you a clue about how important strength is and how it does correspond to being even more functional. He could toss the log as many times as he wanted but he won't be able to toss it further without more strength. Just like I would be able to pull down a mammoth much easier the more strength I had.
-
Erwan Le Corre. He's great, I've seen his stuff before, but I think this is a perfect example of a general physical (or visual) limit for these kind of routines. Not that most people wouldn't be satisfied with his build and fitness. I saw the question as how big one can get on a clean diet, and although their might have been some massive carnivorous gorillas in olden days, today - substance free - one is going to have to be open to techniques that are known to augment size and strength, and probably have a lower expectation of how this looks physically than muscle mags, but know that certain other builds are possible.
I'm pretty confused by how people are using the term functional strength anyway. Its seems like endurance and strength are being used interchangeably. I can say pretty certainly from experience that going up in reps or complexity in bodyweight does not equate much to increased muscle strength. Maybe we are talking strength of character or determination or something.
here is Timothy Bradley Junior, weighing in at a whopping ~145 lbs. (at 5'6").
http://www.google.com/images?hl=&q=timothy+bradley+jr.&rlz=1B3GGGL_enUS356US356&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=univ&ei=QbcPTM7sMMH68Aahwe3pCA&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ct=title&resnum=4&ved=0CDMQsAQwAw
This man would absolutely pummel Le Corre in seconds. Granted he probably takes many performance enhancing substances, trains for fighting, and probably does include many non-weighted activities, the point is, is that your choice in activities will affect your body's development, which has impact both on size and strength. Fighters almost always do compound exercises, they would not grow stronger simply by sparring all day and doing pushups.
Bode Miller (skier) I remember had figured out some interesting ways to combine compound exercise on contraptions he built himself in addition to 'paleo' type stuff like pushing heavy things up hills and running with backpacks full of weights and so forth. Its good to get creative, its not do or die with this stuff but if one wants a 'muscular' build, instead of lean or 'athletic', I think arguing over what is paleo or whatever, is kind of moot. We are talking modern society here and sometimes as Josh says there are advantages to having a build that isn't hidden easily under a t-shirt.
-
I'm afraid the above claims are rather misguided. There's already been plenty of mention of "muscle-bound" bodybuilders who are, in theory, very strong, but would be useless in a fight with someone else who has better functional strength. Simply put, lifting artificial weights merely makes one better at lifting artificial weights, that's pretty much it. Functional strength is quite a different thing.
-
lol... such horrible reading comprehension. Very typical absurd response from TD and you completely missed the point as usual.
Honestly, try one time and address the points I made. Once you realize they are completely reasonable, attempt to rectify your remarks above about anything that I said that is misguided. Admit you are wrong..just one time please. You've made such absurd remarks in the past and never go back on anything you say.
You'll probably ignore this last part, but you do make many more good posts than bad. Be reasonable, that is all. Its ok to be wrong.
Also, bodybuilding does not equate at all, not one bit to strength training. Stop confusing the two.
The name of this sub-forum is a farce and should be changed to strength training. Absolutely no one should be bodybuilding.
-
Honestly, try one time and address the points I made. Once you realize they are completely reasonable, attempt to rectify your remarks above about anything that I said that is misguided. Admit you are wrong..just one time please. You've made such absurd remarks in the past and never go back on anything you say. .
Well, that last is, of course, wholly untrue, as I have admitted previous errors in the past.
What you've done in that last post, is make a wild, science-fiction-like claim re clones! I wasn't talking about strength in a vague general sense but functional strength which is quite different(in other words, a man born in palaeo times with a palaeo lifestyle would easily beat in combat a modern person who had merely done some artificial weight-lifting). As for the bodybuilding reference, it's a term generally used to describe building a better-looking physique which is also related to enhancing strength, so is a perfectly acceptable, more general title for the forum than strength-training.
I would agree re 1 issue:- that no one nowadays can realistically emulate a palaeolithic lifestyle re daily exercise etc. so that some artificial usages such as weightlifting can enhance a particular (artificial)sport, but I dispute the notion that weightlifting enhances functional strength to any major extent.
As for me, I've previously gone through the whole weightlifting routine and became pretty good at lifting weights with massive thighs. Unfortunately, it wasn't much use re improving real, functional strength.
-
lol... gg TD
-
Thanks for the thoughts on paleo strength Tyler and everyone. I like the powerlifter physique.
What are you defining as 'functional strength' Tyler? I agree 'pumping' low weights will make you bulky and not that proportionally strong, but if you follow a 'hardgainer' routine and do 5 sets to failure, squats deadlifts, bench...you're gonna get strong by any definition.
Maybe wrist strength is the elephant in the room, because a strong wrist will give you massive bang for the buck compared to other things.
I know a bit about fighting techniques...I have a friend who just lifts, and in a confrontation he could almost certainly take me out, because strength is a massive advantage. I'm a reasonably fit strong guy.
-
You can do bodybuilding for strength and size. I do it for strength and definition, as I have gotten my muscles to a size I like, and perhaps my genetic limit without dramatically increasing calories. Being strong is very important to health, more so than size.
-
You can do bodybuilding for strength and size. I do it for strength and definition, as I have gotten my muscles to a size I like, and perhaps my genetic limit without dramatically increasing calories. Being strong is very important to health, more so than size.
That I agree with. 1 of the things the palaeo researchers talk about is how often muscle-size/build is directly related to early death in old age - in other words, many old people get (often life-threatening) accidents from something as simple as falling as their musculature is not strong enough, whereas in palaeo times their muscles would have been constantly exercised on a daily basis so that such issues would be greatly reduced.
As for the issue of functional strength, that's complicated. For example, when I was doing weight-training I found it eventually much easier to lift, say, 70kg of weights on my back while doing squats among other exercises. By contrast, despite all that weight-training, I was nowhere near as good when trying to lift different objects weighing much the same - in other words, weight-training uses muscles in too artificial a way, whereas more normal activities require different sets of muscles used in different, more complex ways etc.. Ross Enamait, the bodyweight trainer, gives similiar examples of weight-lifters who could lift heavy weights all day but were complete pussies when trying pull-ups and so on.
-
I gave up traditional lifting because I just don't care anymore. I think it made me stronger, both functional and gym strength if you will. I think it can create imbalances though and possibly lead to injury to develop muscles in that way. I lift kettlebells that I leave at my bjj gym. I think the bottom line is that your body will respond to what you train it with. Functional strength isn't an absolute term as different people have different functions they have to perform in life. You might find yourself in a survival situation where you have to swim very far, maybe climb something, or you might be a furniture mover. Just do something, if you don't like the results you can do something else. It's not like you'll be stuck with the physique you develop from a certain routine. I hear women saying all the time "I want to try lifting weights but don't wanna get big muscles" as if they won't be able to control their muscle size or get rid of them. In reality it's hard work gaining muscle and pretty easy to get rid of it. If I had more free time and wasn't going to the bjj gym I might try building a little home gym with creative stuff like pushing/pulling exercises, big pieces of metal to juggle around for grip strength, contraption for pull ups and other bodyweight exercises etc...
-
As for the issue of functional strength, that's complicated. For example, when I was doing weight-training I found it eventually much easier to lift, say, 70kg of weights on my back while doing squats among other exercises. By contrast, despite all that weight-training, I was nowhere near as good when trying to lift different objects weighing much the same - in other words, weight-training uses muscles in too artificial a way, whereas more normal activities require different sets of muscles used in different, more complex ways etc.. Ross Enamait, the bodyweight trainer, gives similiar examples of weight-lifters who could lift heavy weights all day but were complete pussies when trying pull-ups and so on.
this brings up only one relevant thing, that certain types of natural/variable exercise have more of an advantage on working various muscle groups. This is precisely why some athletes like Bode Miller that I mentioned, have integrated such things INTO their strength training. The advantage of barbell weight training is precisely artificial control of circumstances and actually engaging specific muscles or muscle groups often to failure in order to grow both larger and more functional. Other than the desired result, it really doesn't matter if this uses a uniform plate, or a natural object. If you have a tax accountant that takes a chunk of time after work to beat a tire with a sledgehammer, for all intents and purposes this is weight training. Picking up heavy boxes in a stockroom, while great exercise, will never get someone to the level of an Olympic lifter, who will 100% assuredly be able to lift even heavier boxes, although not decidedly for shorter or longer periods of who cares? We are talking strength and size, not endurance and speed.
If someone is training for size and vanity, sure its proven that they might not be able to preform the same physical feats of endurance or even strength than a leaner person. But this conversation becomes ridiculous and off-topic if this is the talking point and we are not talking practical everyday solutions for strength and muscle gains. Its obvious that as I think was mentioned earlier, if you take the same person and put them on various combinations from 0-100% of bodyweight/natural movement/and serious weight training. the period doing the most percentage of weights would show the most increase in total strength over no weights and for any function. I've seen bodyweight masters and free runners and martial artists do all kinds of amazing physical feats, but this is not strength as is bring used here. You can argue indefinitely what type of combination of endurance/strength/speed and what type of build is superior but at the end of the day the same guys that lug refrigerators up stairs you see squatting at the gym.
-
Err, the notion that people who lug heavy objects around like fridges must by definition be weightlifters is incredibly dodgy. Strange though it may seem, people can develop great strength without needing to do artificial weightlifting of metal dumbbells. You have to bear in mind that for millenia beforehand, people were exposed to regular stresses such as pulling ploughs through hardened soil most days etc.
And when I refer to functional strength, I mean just that, not strength in a very vague, general sense. Sure, there are plenty of muscle-bound weightlifters who seem strong at first glance re weights but that's different from more useful activities.Ross Enamait also mentioned how weightlifters often neglected certain muscle-areas for various reasons, not just vanity. And RawKyle mentioned another reason why bodyweight training is better:- weightlifting is such an artificial process that injuries are more likely to occur as a result re too much stress on the wrong muscle-groups etc.
I used to be quite in favour of extra strength until I came across 1 guy who was an absolute master at Ju-Jitsu and managed to overcome me with ease despite him being a really skinny little creature. That made me realise that there are many other things than big muscles which contribute re general effectiveness. Functional strength is another factor.
-
I think more and more that you're talking about wrist strength which martial artists develop. It's supposed to be the second most important set of muscles for winning a fight: legs-wrists-chest
A lot of these bodyweight/functional exercises will naturally develop the wrist before the larger muscles, so will give you more 'strength' for your size.
However, if you deadlift a lot you're not gonna have weak wrists...and if you deadlift and include wrist exercises you're gonna be 'stronger' than the guy that just does the latter.
-
TD tarding things up again. The deadlift is one of the most paleo movements my modern human body can do and is probably the one exercise you would never want to do without. Deadlifting is one of the movements that paleo man was doing on a daily basis. Deadlifting is simply picking heavy shit off the ground which we did a lot of. Deadlifts not only help you pick shit off the ground but will help you hold onto and pull a megafauna to the ground. Paleo people were deadlifting all the time.
Next, after deadlifting they would need to hoist the meat up into their arms. Doing this is very similar to how we moderns use an exercise called the power clean, which uses a tremendous amount of force from the hips and legs to boost a weight as high as it can go. Paleo man was doing this as well. Power cleans will also help you more optimally penetrate a woman.
Sure, these movements are "artificial" just as you claim all sports to be and identical twins which are wild, science fiction. I'm sorry I don't have mammoths wandering about my town. Again, I'm not saying that lifting compound movements is the end all be all, its not. I would love to have all sorts of objects around that I could toss and throw around not in one single plane and do other body-weight activities. And like KD mentioned hopefully I'll be able to train like Bode Miller with weights not so tightly constricted to a one plane of motion. Though kettlebells can take care of some of this and creativity can pretty much cover the rest.
I'm not sure why you can't see that strength training through various barbell or kettlebell or man-made objects uses very similar movements and muscles to what paleo man would use to kill an animal and bring it back to camp. I can deadlift well-over 2x bodyweight, much more than I did a couple years ago. This almost surely means I would be able to bring down a larger animal and take more meat back with me and prosper accordingly with the various women of my choice. Its rather difficult to replace hunting animals with crude weapons and hauling them back to camp - so why not use weights instead? Again, this is just part of the program...
What truly is artificial is our diets - we eat domesticated animals that never existed in paleo times, completely drained from blood, no brains or the entire animal. We don't spend anywhere near the time outside in the sun as we did. The fruits and vegs are highly domesticated, moreso than the animals we eat and of course our environment is no where near the quality of paleo times. I'd say most of our diets are just as far away if not farther from an ideal paleo diet than a good strength and conditioning program would be centered around barbells is away from how paleo man "trained".
Also, many body-weight exercises can be much more "artificial" and harmful than even boring bodybuilding exercises like bicep curls. Push-ups for example pretty much suck and will not help you much at all getting more meat, not compared to deadlifting or squatting.
Man-made weights and the various programs that have been designed around them will help correct imbalances and other muscular and skeletal issues that have accumulated from decades of poor movements. I am doing some of these now.
-
Err, the notion that people who lug heavy objects around like fridges must by definition be weightlifters is incredibly dodgy. Strange though it may seem, people can develop great strength without needing to do artificial weightlifting of metal dumbbells. You have to bear in mind that for millenia beforehand, people were exposed to regular stresses such as pulling ploughs through hardened soil most days etc.
you are still majorly distorting the definition of strength if you are referencing martial artists. Once again the subject is 'how big', obviously its not talking about some master of reality that can kill a man with his pinky, this is not strength.
here is the world's strong man competition
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World%27s_Strongest_Man
you can see that there are many exercises that are extreme versions of what has been labeled 'functional strength exercises'. There is absolutely no way that an everyday person of any time period incorporating resistance into their daily routines no matter how arduous would ever have a chance in these competitions, same with any martial arts master.
In order to build serious strength and size, you need to continuously stress your muscle groups. This cannot be accomplished simply by everyday activities no matter how stressful. You can do this 'functional strength training' by using some kind of natural object in combination with movement which might make up a huge piece of the puzzle but still won't make a difference unless you do something artificial like change the weight over time. Without using any kind of weight you are in the dust as far as putting necessary strain on your body.
I worked for 2 years moving insanely heavy objects which involved lifting, pushing and pulling. I didn't leave this experience particularly bigger or stronger. My boss had a freakish ability to just throw things around like they were foam, but he lacked any real muscle definition and no one would ever look at him and say he had a strong build.
the subject is how to build strength and size. you can express your preference all you wish about effectiveness especially in fighting but strength as defined by a normal person includes in all cases ability to move weight from point A to point B. If one is doing various bodyweight and functional strength exercises, and CANNOT compete in lifting isolated weight in a non complex circumstance, their routine is clearly not as efficient in building strength. If the weight trainer can't do simple feats like pull-ups, I can guarantee they are not in the world's strongest man competition and I can guarantee all of these men incorporate weight training into their routines.
Ironically I prefer a smaller more efficient build myself, and I do body weight training and almost no weight training. But in usefulness to others, I recognize that I can fine tune my routine and push myself to the limit and will never have massive strength or size. If one has a goal of serious size and strength (the ability to lift a giant weight if necessary) they will do much better in time with weighted exercises, I can say that 100% with experience and confidence.
-
Err, the notion that people who lug heavy objects around like fridges must by definition be weightlifters is incredibly dodgy. Strange though it may seem, people can develop great strength without needing to do artificial weightlifting of metal dumbbells. You have to bear in mind that for millenia beforehand, people were exposed to regular stresses such as pulling ploughs through hardened soil most days etc.
And when I refer to functional strength, I mean just that, not strength in a very vague, general sense. Sure, there are plenty of muscle-bound weightlifters who seem strong at first glance re weights but that's different from more useful activities.Ross Enamait also mentioned how weightlifters often neglected certain muscle-areas for various reasons, not just vanity. And RawKyle mentioned another reason why bodyweight trainining is better:- weightlifting is such an artificial process that injuries are more likely to occur as a result re too much stress on the wrong muscle-groups etc.
this is just ignorance towards proper weight training. Exercises such as deadlifts, squats, row variations would absolutely 100% increase people's ability to pull a plough or carry an animal or wood or other 'natural' activities. All athletes do weight and strength training. Proper weight training creates functional strength there is no two ways about it.
Another EXTREMELY IMPORTANT point that people have not mentioned relating to 'getting too big' is diet. You simply won't get any bigger if you don't eat more. If you don't want to to get 'too big' don't eat excess calories. You don't grow no matter how you train.
-
TD tarding things up again.
I broadly agree with your side of the argument, but let's have less of the inflammatory language. If you start getting into that, it gives a bad taste to the whole thing and just creates bad feeling all round.
-
I think we should change this forum to strength training, bodybuilding seems so 80's
-
The points I was making were simple:- 1) most weightlifters ignore certain parts of the body in order to "look good" by focusing too much on the thighs or the biceps and the like. The wrist-aspect was one of the various things I was thinking of, which is routinely neglected. But also, lifting metal dumbbells requires a specific set of muscles working together in a limited sense, whereas more natural activities would require more muscles used in a different way/combination. There's 1 example from bodyweight trainers, giving an example of a child and an adult competing with each other using the bear-crawl(all fours but no knees on the floor), pointing out that a child has more functional strength in this regard than the adult because the child is using more muscles in tandem with each other.
The point, ultimately, is that functional strength is more useful for more natural activities such as fighting etc. Plus, a truly major benefit is that bodyweight-training, unlike weight-lifting, leads to far fewer injuries as it's more natural a practice. That was one of the reasons why I quit weight-lifting.
That said, I doubt that anyone nowadays has the time to emulate the very high levels of daily activity/exercise that palaeo peoples routinely underwent on a daily basis, so for Olympic types artificial methods might be necessary, as they require less time to carry out, by contrast.
-
I broadly agree with your side of the argument, but let's have less of the inflammatory language. If you start getting into that, it gives a bad taste to the whole thing and just creates bad feeling all round.
Ah, don't worry about it. The reason for that language is basically because, in the past, I dared to criticise 1 of Taubes' claims, and Taubes happens to be his god. I had pointed out, via a quotation, that 1 of PD's claims was a terminological inexactitude, as regards Taubes.
-
(http://i177.photobucket.com/albums/w223/greeksquared/taubesworship-1.jpg)
-
.
-
That's just stupid and deliberately highly selective. That particular photo was, of course, made ages ago, some c.7-8(?) years ago in my place in Italy during a period when I was (R)VLC for a very long period and doing frequent whole-day fasts, along with some caloric restriction of sorts - and not doing too much exercise-wise at the time.After that point, I did indeed later on develop thick thighs as a result of squats with weights and other weightlifting routines etc. at the local YMCA in London, not exactly difficult to do. Of course, these days, as I've already mentioned before, I've had the sense to quit the weight-training, though not enough sense to do as much general exercise as I should - so, I don't have those unsightly large thighs any more.
That reminds me, I should have updated that photo ages ago. It just seemed appropriate as it showed me better off than I was pre-RPD diet, despite my extreme skinniness at the time, and was shortly after most of my health-issues had been resolved. I suppose what's needed is 3 or 4 photos., before/during/after etc.
Oh, and for the record, re another poster's silly purposely exaggerated remark, while my sleep has improved to the point where I don't need to sleep as long as I used to in SAD-diet days, I miraculously do actually still need to sleep some hours a day not merely 1 hour, and have not suggested otherwise.
-
The points I was making were simple:- 1) most weightlifters ignore certain parts of the body in order to "look good" by focusing too much on the thighs or the biceps and the like. The wrist-aspect was one of the various things I was thinking of, which is routinely neglected. But also, lifting metal dumbbells requires a specific set of muscles working together in a limited sense, whereas more natural activities would require more muscles used in a different way/combination. There's 1 example from bodyweight trainers, giving an example of a child and an adult competing with each other using the bear-crawl(all fours but no knees on the floor), pointing out that a child has more functional strength in this regard than the adult because the child is using more muscles in tandem with each other.
The point, ultimately, is that functional strength is more useful for more natural activities such as fighting etc. Plus, a truly major benefit is that bodyweight-training, unlike weight-lifting, leads to far fewer injuries as it's more natural a practice. That was one of the reasons why I quit weight-lifting.
These are valid points that have already been addressed and acknowledged but I think the issue people are hung up on is actually way simpler, that body-weight and regular resistance through activities will NOT result in the same or even remotely comparable increases in strength, size, and physique. the stereotyping around 'bodybuilding' is inaccurate because the strongest people on the planet, probably have to do training outside traditional lifts, as they are required in the competitions to do these complex feats. They would not get there being the sole owner of a machine-less farm or doing any other kind of physical activity that wasn't controlled and deliberate for strength training. These people who strain their bodies deliberately have 'functional strength' and people that use strength in their daily functioning have less strength. The comment about refrigerators was not talking about delivery boys, who have 0 chance of lifting a fridge single-handled up flights of stairs, but people who insanely do it alone for fun and exercise. These people would have to build up these muscles somehow with weights or some kind of gradual increase in objects, which is basically the same exact thing, only in the form of weight+motion which has already been mentioned as a strength training technique. This isn't a comparison of gym flunkies but traditional and innovative weight bearing exercise to body-weight or daily rigorous activity.
Err, the notion that people who lug heavy objects around like fridges must by definition be weightlifters is incredibly dodgy. Strange though it may seem, people can develop great strength without needing to do artificial weightlifting of metal dumbbells. You have to bear in mind that for millenia beforehand, people were exposed to regular stresses such as pulling ploughs through hardened soil most days etc.
I'm glad to avoid any argument about paleo times, but clearly here with ploughs you are refrenacing some aspect of civilization >7,000 years ago. There is absolutely no way I believe anyone doing their Ploughing and strenous daily life they could ever work up to pulling a 904 lb yoke or a topless car 25 meters. Bfore any mention of steroids, lets just say that these folks would not take their steroids and go out and do pullups and pushups all day while working in their graden.
the other super irony is that Bruce Lee, more than anyone else in modern consciousness instilled the idea of size's irrelevance in fighting, and not only did he lift weights, he used modern equipment to do so before moving on to more compound traditional exercises later in his development.
Bruce Lee’s Weight Training Routine
Bruce Lee Clean and Press – 2 sets of 8 reps
The clean and press is a classic weight lifters exercise. Unlike bodybuilding exercises, which work muscles in isolation, Bruce Lee’s weight lifting/power lifting exercises work muscles together, i.e. they are compound movements. Bruce Lee performed clean and presses in a very intensive fashion, that is, without rest between reps. This made the exercise a cardio and endurance exercise as well as a weight training exercise. In the clean and press a barbell is lifted from the floor, and in one explosive movement the weight is lifted up to rest on the front of the shoulders – this is the clean. Afterwards, the weight is then pressed upwards, and held overhead. It is then lowered to the floor in one movement, and repeated. A good form is essential in the clean and press, it is also important not to attempt to lift too much weight, as injuries to the lower back are common in poorly executed clean and presses.
Bruce Lee Barbell Squat – 2 sets of 12 reps
The squat is one of the most important compound exercises in the Bruce Lee Workout, especially for martial artists. It develops a solid base and core. In the standard squat, which should always be performed in a squat rack for safety, a barbell is placed across the shoulders and a squat is then performed. Bruce Lee advised there should be no pause in the lowest position, instead as soon as your thighs reach a horizontal position, you should rise again to a standing position. The squat works the hips, glutes, hamstrings, calves and quads.
Bruce Lee Barbell Pullovers – 2 sets of 8 reps
The barbell pullover is a weight training exercise that is less common these days. It is the classic rib-box expander. To perform a pullover you should lie on a flat bench, hold a barbell with a shoulder width grip overhead, and then lower it backwards behind your head, keeping the elbows slightly bent. The bar should be held as far back as it is comfortable. Some people can touch the floor behind them with the bar, but this is not recommended without adequate training. Use a light weight to start with, as this is a deceptively difficult movement.
Source: Bruce Lee Workout | Fitness and Strength Workouts http://www.motleyhealth.com/fitness_and_strength/martial-arts/bruce-lee-workout#ixzz0qYePYH31
http://www.motleyhealth.com/fitness_and_strength/martial-arts/bruce-lee-workout
-
Oh, and for the record, re another poster's silly purposely exaggerated remark, while my sleep has improved to the point where I don't need to sleep as long as I used to in SAD-diet days, I miraculously do actually still need to sleep some hours a day not merely 1 hour, and have not suggested otherwise.
heh, I believe that was me, it was a quote from the actual fight club book/film:
"Supposedly he was born in a mental institution, and he sleeps only one hour a night. He's a great man, do you know about Tyler Durden?"
It was meant to be a laugh held by all, not an insult or claim as such, and figured it was harmless within the journal and outside of general chat, particularly this conversation.
-
heh, I believe that was me, it was a quote from the actual fight club book/film:
"Supposedly he was born in a mental institution, and he sleeps only one hour a night. He's a great man, do you know about Tyler Durden?"
It was meant to be a laugh held by all, not an insult or claim as such, and figured it was harmless within the journal and outside of general chat, particularly this conversation.
Oh, I see. That reminds me, I only ever saw that marvellous film once and remember only 1 or 2 quotations. As an anarchist, I found it a source of inspiration and I really ought to see it again.
-
I'm glad to avoid any argument about paleo times, but clearly here with ploughs you are refrenacing some aspect of civilization >7,000 years ago. There is absolutely no way I believe anyone doing their Ploughing and strenous daily life they could ever work up to pulling a 904 lb yoke or a topless car 25 meters. Bfore any mention of steroids, lets just say that these folks would not take their steroids and go out and do pullups and pushups all day while working in their graden.
We do seem to be talking about quite different things. I'm not talking about strength in general, merely functional strength - so that, with some tasks, a person with higher functional strength would have to endure less effort to carry out particular tasks than a weightlifter etc. Also, the issue of steroids is apt - the fact that so many weightlifters are forced to use artificial methods like steroids in order to bulk up in any serious way, invalidates such a practice as steroids are very harmful in the long-term re side-effects. But even those who don't do steroids and do lots of weightlifting will be more prone to more frequent injury than people doing more normal exercise, so, over time, the lives of the latter will be more productive. Granted, those doing a lot of bodyweight-training and just a bit of weight-training would be less affected, by implication and have better functional strength by comparison.
-
The simple fact is that strength in the gym or at your house = functional strength (F.S.) and the less body fat you have the more F.S. you have in some situations.
If a person grabs a 50lb dumbbell and does nothing but bicep curls, only then or in similar conditions will it not translate to F.S.
I doubt people on here do something like that l), if someone asks what do to, I'll recommend what I do, 2 days a week of heaviest olympic/power lifting you can do and 5 days of circuit training or mix it with other high intensity training (sparring, competitive sprinting/ swimming/etc...) take 2 days off a week if you feel you need it (not consecutive).
These 2 websites will explain F.S. in Gymnasts & Sprinters better than I can:
1 http://www.sportsci.org/jour/0003/was.html
This one is titled for female gymnasts, but it applies to males and non-gymnasts as well, If you scroll down, I use the exact same table for minimal hypertrophy that they have and my weight workouts are built around those principles.
2 http://www.dragondoor.com/articler/mode3/269/
This website does a nice job of explaining why, if I get 2 subjects with the same weight, height and 400m time and one of them just sprints and the other one sprints and does minimal hypertrophy strength training will have more speed and this applies to any aspect of F.S.
"If force alone was the major factor in speed, then a 400-pound man able to pound down 700 pounds of force would win every race -but we know that's not what happens. If we match our 400-pound behemoth against a 170-pound man who can lay down 500 lbs of force, there's no contest.
Big man bites the dust. Why?
Mass-specific force. The 400-pound man is generating a meager 1.75 times his bodyweight against the ground while our thin man is applying a whopping 2.94 times his bodyweight. Like our rocket example, big man can't keep up from the start and quickly runs out of gas trying to push his mammoth mass. Even though the big man can generate 40% more force, it pales compared to the thin man's 68% greater mass-specific force. "
The best bet you can do IMO, is the program I use on top, cut your bf% to the lowest that is healthy for you with Zero carb and calorie cycling (fat=dead weight you have to carry with you all day that slows your performance), lift heavy 2 days week, do high intensity training 3-5 days a week.
The minimum you can get away with if you want noticeable benefits is 2.5 hours/week, 9 hours a week for a few months and you'll be doing some amazing things you never thought you could do.
-
Well, we will have to agree to disagree re this issue of functional strength as my experiences are quite different re injuries etc.. As for RZC, that meant I was personally unable to lift any weights to any meaningful extent during my RZC phases. I found rather that I needed a lot of raw carbs to keep going. Though I am pleasantly surprised to hear about RZC people like you doing fine with weights as I'd read various sources suggesting that ZC was great for aerobic activity but not for anaerobic activity.
-
Though I am pleasantly surprised to hear about RZC people like you doing fine with weights as I'd read various sources suggesting that ZC was great for aerobic activity but not for anaerobic activity.
Thanks for writing that, Tyler. I am so tired of hearing I need carbs for lifting when I have my best results in strength and leanness without them, including not bonking when lifting and hiking like I was when I was eating carbs.
-
incluidng not bonking when lifting and hiking like I was when I was eating carbs.
Oh right. I haven't heard of carbs causing this problem before.
;)
-
Savage were you very fit before you went low/zero carb? It makes sense to me that high level of fitness would help adapt to it.
-
Thanks for writing that, Tyler. I am so tired of hearing I need carbs for lifting when I have my best results in strength and leanness without them, incluidng not bonking when lifting and hiking like I was when I was eating carbs.
what is "not bonking"? Is this some american slang for what?
-
Sorry, GS. Bonking is a term for when you "hit the wall" when exercising-you feel like your legs and arms are just wooden.
-
Or something else in the UK. I'm not one to turn down a cheap joke.
-
Or something else in the UK. I'm not one to turn down a cheap joke.
Yes, I know. The 1st time klowcarb mentioned that word a while back, I was a bit surprised to say the least until I found out it's also used as an exercising term.
-
Savage were you very fit before you went low/zero carb? It makes sense to me that high level of fitness would help adapt to it.
Fit, but carrying more bodyfat than now and the carbs made me sluggish.
Now, I'm very fit, this comes from having less body fat, more strength and speed and better fuel which in turn allows me to reach my natural/genetic potential.
Thanks for writing that, Tyler. I am so tired of hearing I need carbs for lifting when I have my best results in strength and leanness without them, incluidng not f*****g when lifting and hiking like I was when I was eating carbs.
Oh right. I haven't heard of carbs causing this problem before.
;)
LOL, that's how you read it? ;D
If I read like that too, that only when you eat carbs, you're bonking when lifting and hiking, then to hell with this ZC crap.......I wanna eat carbs and bonk during lifting and hiking too!!
-
Ha, you guys crack me up. Bonking is more of a term used in endurance sports like running, but I definitely felt it when I was consuming carbs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonk_(condition)
I love fucking and being zero carb; but not having a bad workout!
-
Personally my goal is simply to have a great physique that I can realistically sustain for a long long time and maintain the best general health possible. Bigger isn't *better* imho, I've been on health and fitness forums with guys that think weighing anything below 200lbs and squatting less than 600lbs qualifies you as a "pinner".
I'd want to be 180-190 max at 5'8, that sounds sustainable for the next 40ish+ years
-
I find it hard to decide how big and strong to get. At the moment I'm fairly lean and do mostly bodyweight stuff.
I'm very tempted to start the weights and get big and strong. Not extreme bodybuilder, just functional strength and a good size. It's got a lot of advantages for life in our society. I can't help thinking it's not natural though and will have some bad effects later on.
It looks like our ancestors were runners first and foremost, fairly strong, but mostly lean and fit.
What are your thoughts?
i've been up to 215 lbs fairly solid muscle at 5'10" ( could do 30 chin ups at that weight ). that was definitely a mistake - i now have stretch marks all over my body - my arms, shoulders, chest, back, even my ass.
now my goal is 155 lbs, but only because its the highest weight i think i can maintain at a low bodyfat given all of the injuries i have accumulated over the years and without any performance enhancing drugs ( no money on that now ).
if i was younger, no injuries, and had the money to spend on steroids i would have aimed for about 180 lbs.
girls will like anything above 130 pounds as long as you have a low bodyfat. but once you go above 200 pounds or so people begin to see you as a freak, a monster and an idiot.
i would advise you not to set any weight goals but rather simply do classic sports such as running, swimming, olympic lifting etc and let your body decide how it wants to look to adapt to that stress. if you are genuinely fit you will feel good about yourself, which will give you the confidence and the confidence will get you the girls. it doesn't matter at what weight that happens.
-
Have a video of the 30 chins at 215lbs?
-
I think some of you could use this :D
Weightlifter- A lifter competing in 2 lifts, snatch, and clean and jerk. These lifters compete in the highest weight in a single rep of each movement, then both highest attempts are added up for a "total". The lifter with the highest "total" is the best weightlifter. (Olympics) -also these lifts are highly technical, more emphasis on technique here
Powerlifter- A lifter competing in 3 lifts...squat, bench, deadlift. Also trying to achieve maximum weight in a single rep of each lift. These 3 lifts added together give a total, highest total is the strongest powerlifter. -these lifts are still technical when at a high level, but much less than a weightlifer---more strength is involved here, griding out a heavy weight.
Strongman- Random lifting events usually involving full body strength and endurance. Can be deadlifts, squats, truck pulls, carrying heavy stuff in general. (This is what you have seen on espn and such) -mostly endurance and strength
These 3 types are strength athletes, and they train appropriately to their sport, and they all train entirely differently. They do not train do have ripped abs, or big guns--they train to better themselves in the sport! Therefore its silly to say one or the other is not the best at MMA, or anything else. Its like saying a golfer isn't the best at rugby--they are 2 different things.
Then you have...
Bodybuilder- one who lifts weights for the sole reason of a desired look, with little to no emphasis on strength, or endurance. These are the all show no go guys--but they can always mix in some of the above strength sports, but again that's not whats going to win the competition. They are judged on looks-symmetry, size, and condition.
Gym rat- everyone else. Mostly lifting for looks, but do not compete, in the gym doing their own thing. Usually these are the guys you see making little to no progress year in year out. THIS is what you guys are mostly talking about. Of course these guys have little functional strength---they are not strong, they have not hit a PR or gained a quarter pound in 12 years!
-
Have a video of the 30 chins at 215lbs?
no, but this is a pic of me @ 215 lbs from those days:
http://c1.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/9/l_8d1657c34cccc6583df549a97b82e510.jpg
part of the reason i could do it is 1-T the drug i was on. unlike most steroids that give you water mass 1-T gives you superhuman power with relatively little mass gain. too bad its no longer available.
the other reason is i had an excellent mind to muscle connection on that exercise. 95% of people simply don't have the brains that it takes to do chin ups effectively. chin ups are all about being able to recruit your back muscles efficiently. i could easily do chins without using my arm muscles AT ALL. most people could never do this not because their muscles aren't strong enough - but because their brains aren't.
also you have to understand that you can train for size or you can train for power. i trained for power. for a workout i would do sets of 5 reps of chins with two 45lb plates hanging on the weight belt.
but in retrospect i regret ALL OF IT. i wish i had never taken drugs and i wish i had never trained hardcore as i did. i wish i always trained the way i do now - which is mostly just swim and bike, and do some occasional light lifting. but mistakes in life are inevitable.
-
but in retrospect i regret ALL OF IT. i wish i had never taken drugs and i wish i had never trained hardcore as i did. i wish i always trained the way i do now - which is mostly just swim and bike, and do some occasional light lifting. but mistakes in life are inevitable.
Why do you say that? Assuming one doesn't take any drugs or eat SAD.
-
now my goal is 155 lbs, but only because its the highest weight i think i can maintain at a low bodyfat given all of the injuries i have accumulated over the years and without any performance enhancing drugs ( no money on that now ).
girls will like anything above 130 pounds as long as you have a low bodyfat. but once you go above 200 pounds or so people begin to see you as a freak, a monster and an idiot.
i would advise you not to set any weight goals but rather simply do classic sports such as running, swimming, olympic lifting etc and let your body decide how it wants to look to adapt to that stress. if you are genuinely fit you will feel good about yourself, which will give you the confidence and the confidence will get you the girls. it doesn't matter at what weight that happens.
I would be curious as well. I don't understand your situation so I won't comment on that, but although your advice sounds appropriate , the weights you list are quite strange. I was around 130-140 with no measurable bodyfat as a fruit eater and it was not a pretty sight at all. I now fluctuate between 160-170, been told I look much bigger than the numbers and am content but there is no way I'm at even an average size. As soon as I have a loose fitting shirt and tight pants I look basically thin. I also have a hard time believing people necessarily see 200lb as freakish, I mean even lean actors can have well over that bodyweight and with fairly little body fat. It might not be the most natural build for all, but certainly appeals to some (women). I don't worry about the girls in this respect, as my build might be appealing as a balance of lean and fit, but I definitely think 10-20 lbs more would look better, although I don't push myself really to get there. I think for many getting in the 150-160 range, no matter how ripped is not going to be the most flattering
-
That's damn impressive neuro! What were your other stats at that time?
-
sounds like you are more into looks than health.
girls will like anything above 130 pounds as long as you have a low bodyfat.
i'm sorry but that's bunch of BS. if a man looks just a little better than gorilla but has confidence and knows how to treat women, he can get any woman he wants.
when i was young and stupid i was thinking in the similar lines, so i bought a cruiser motorcycle to attract women. it attracted mostly stupid pretty girls.
then i got smarter, got rid of the bike, and had much better success with attractive women (not stupid pretty girls).
-
Why do you say that? Assuming one doesn't take any drugs or eat SAD.
because in the long run all you get from training hardcore is permanent injuries.
you can train a lot - that's fine - just stay moderate and level headed.
it's best not to talk to anybody in the gym and work out alone. that way you don't have to prove anything to anybody. you just go about your business and go home.
-
I would be curious as well. I don't understand your situation so I won't comment on that, but although your advice sounds appropriate , the weights you list are quite strange. I was around 130-140 with no measurable bodyfat as a fruit eater and it was not a pretty sight at all. I now fluctuate between 160-170, been told I look much bigger than the numbers and am content but there is no way I'm at even an average size. As soon as I have a loose fitting shirt and tight pants I look basically thin. I also have a hard time believing people necessarily see 200lb as freakish, I mean even lean actors can have well over that bodyweight and with fairly little body fat. It might not be the most natural build for all, but certainly appeals to some (women). I don't worry about the girls in this respect, as my build might be appealing as a balance of lean and fit, but I definitely think 10-20 lbs more would look better, although I don't push myself really to get there. I think for many getting in the 150-160 range, no matter how ripped is not going to be the most flattering
assuming it's you in your avatar you should simply work on your posture.
this is proper posture:
http://scrapetv.com/News/News%20Pages/Entertainment/images-3/Arnold-Schwarzenegger-bodybuilding.jpg
if you can maintain proper posture with the back straight, chest out and up and stomach sucked in you don't even need any muscles to look athletic. once again though, most people don't know how to do it. it's something you have to work on.
-
What were your other stats at that time?
my favorite stat at the time was 165 blood pressure from the drugs i was on. when the nurse at the doctor's office saw this blood pressure in me (a college student at the time) she said her machine must be broken and she would get a new one. i told her that her machine was fine. my other favorite stat was HDL cholesterol level off from normal by a factor of 10X. sometimes i wonder if during those 2 years i did kill myself and simply don't know it yet.
also i remember sometimes my elbows would give me so much pain ( from overuse ) that i would have tears coming out of my eyes. one day i ended up going home, taking ultram and then finishing my workout while wearing a winter jacket to keep the elbows as warm as possible.
there was some monumental stupidity going on in those days. my parents tried to stop me but my logic was that i knew much more about fitness than they did so i didn't have to listen to them.
-
What kind of life long injuries are you dealing with now? Hows your blood pressure/cholesterol now?
-
assuming it's you in your avatar you should simply work on your posture.
this is proper posture:
http://scrapetv.com/News/News%20Pages/Entertainment/images-3/Arnold-Schwarzenegger-bodybuilding.jpg
if you can maintain proper posture with the back straight, chest out and up and stomach sucked in you don't even need any muscles to look athletic. once again though, most people don't know how to do it. it's something you have to work on.
I'm sure I have plenty to work on in various departments but I'm not positive what you mean really, this wasn't striking any particular pose, i'm actually looking down at the ground working in the garden although I do tend to slouch anyway.
I'm fairly happy with my athleticism and size, I'm just pointing out that my build - while probably much more muscular than most people - is still smaller in size visually to the average build and even some old men and so forth. Say even if I look 170 at 160 (here) due to various diet and cleansing differences, 175-185 would still probably be a better fit even if some of that was fat and certainly where I'm at compered to where I've been.
Not speaking specifically to you, but I think people far too often hide behind a notion that SWD eaters are 'overweight'. In my experience on many forums over the years, this can rationalize all kinds of harmful diets and lifestyle and digestive issues or binging. I think there is some truth that the popular conception of the average build has shifted somewhat even in the last 50 years, with maybe someone like Carey Grant representing what an average build might be or something. Still, lets say I was an actor, I could probably only be casted as a junkie or pizza delivery boy (of course these guys always look much better in the movies than real life counterparts) and never any kind of 'normal' role. I'm flipping through the channels and on Entourage, this guy who has a very streamlined hip kind of look (as opposed to Bale or Jackman or something) and is still like what 175-180 lbs?
I'm not saying some can't look great at lower weights, Iwith various experience know numerical weight is only so meaningful, and I've seen some welterweight boxers that just look huge (although they tend to be fairly short) in the 150 range. But likely these ranges are not going to look normal or I believe are very 'paleo' if that is someones concern.
here is Oleg Saitov who won the gold in the Olympics for welterweight in 1996 and 2000. http://visualrian.com/storage/PreviewWM/0569/98/056998.jpg
-
again I'm not sure what you mean about sucking in your stomach and so forth, i'm just talking about going to the store and such and what peoples impressions might be. When I'm actually working out its a different story.
-
What kind of life long injuries are you dealing with now? Hows your blood pressure/cholesterol now?
my rotator cuffs are very weak now because i constantly injured them. also my hamstring is weak because i once torn it doing sprints. between the rotator cuffs and the hamstring i can't use high intensity on most exercises any more.
my blood pressure now is borderline high at about 135. both my parents who are 30 years older than i am have about 100 blood pressure. my cholesterol is normal now but that doesn't mean that i didn't do permanent damage to my arteries when it was screwed.
-
again I'm not sure what you mean about sucking in your stomach and so forth, i'm just talking about going to the store and such and what peoples impressions might be.
of course you don't know what i'm talking about - that's the entire point :)
yes i am also talking about going to the store. the people's impressions of your physique ( in the store ) are going to be about 50% a function of your posture.
with the kind of posture you have in the pic they will think you must have gotten run over by a truck at some point in your life and now living with a broken back. with proper posture they would think you're a pro athlete.
http://www.ultimatehealthprotocol.com/images/Postures.jpg
the diagram one the right is most people. the diagram on the left is decent but not the limit. his back could still be straighter, his chest could still go more forward and up and his stomach could still go further in. note that it is the SAME person in the diagrams.
basically the forces of gravity work to make you look like the diagram on the right. if you let those forces win you look weak. if you overcome them you look athletic.
-
You have a resting blood pressure of 135 ? :o
Either you've got some awful kidney damage and you are about to die or you are pulling all our legs.
Are you on raw paleo diet or not?
I find this blood pressure hard to believe if you are on raw paleo diet.
I looked at your past posts and it seems you are getting continuous damage from chugging all those high protein shakes daily.
If you switched to raw meat instead of protein shakes you'll save your kidneys and your life.
-
with the kind of posture you have in the pic they will think you must have gotten run over by a truck at some point in your life and now living with a broken back. with proper posture they would think you're a pro athlete.
http://www.ultimatehealthprotocol.com/images/Postures.jpg
Your comparisons are running a little wild don't you think? I do agree that a correct posture can make a huge difference with respect to how others will perceive you. I slouched for many, many years in school and bench pressed incorrectly which lead to me looking like the skeletal figure with bad posture you posted. Head looking down, shoulders pinched forward, thoracic spine curved. I can't seem to stand up straight for more than a few minutes at a time without getting pain somewhere.
As for what is correct posture- that is up for debate and if you do some searching around the forum (search esther gokhale) you will see that many of us believe correct posture to be that which is exhibited by indigenous cultures around the world that normally go barefoot.
I am in the process of rehabilitating myself with a slew of dynamic stretching and light accessory work. One of the programs I am trying to follow that has gotten good reviews is here - http://www.dieselcrew.com/how-to-shoulder-rehab/
Also, many people do steroids without much issue and you can do them relatively safely. This is not an endorsement as nobody here should use them but they aren't as bad as they are made out to be.
-
of course you don't know what i'm talking about - that's the entire point :)
yes i am also talking about going to the store. the people's impressions of your physique ( in the store ) are going to be about 50% a function of your posture.
with the kind of posture you have in the pic they will think you must have gotten run over by a truck at some point in your life and now living with a broken back. with proper posture they would think you're a pro athlete.
http://www.ultimatehealthprotocol.com/images/Postures.jpg
the diagram one the right is most people. the diagram on the left is decent but not the limit. his back could still be straighter, his chest could still go more forward and up and his stomach could still go further in. note that it is the SAME person in the diagrams.
basically the forces of gravity work to make you look like the diagram on the right. if you let those forces win you look weak. if you overcome them you look athletic.
ok, maybe I didn't make myself clear, so I'll take your response as 100% well intentioned.
I seriously doubt posture comes into play at all in what I'm talking about specifically. I'm not one in the same with the person who is trying to figure out how to improve my situation to chase girls. My only problem with women is me choosing which ones might not freak out over raw eating. I'm pointing out what is obvious to most westerners that in any posture - say laying down to avoid any possible confusion - that my actual physical body is much smaller than average. Even if I can distort this is positive light, I was actually speaking more of me sizing up others than them me. I already said many people will prefer a yoga-type build these days to some meathead, but that I can be sitting next to an old man or homeless person on the bus and they might have bigger tailored dimensions. I don't they give two shits about my spine.
Laying down I would still fit in the same (probably S-small, I don't own them but I suspect so) male dress shirt and size 30 pants. I love aspects of that and having a smaller build that doesn't require tons of food that I can't afford and eat comfortably. I ran into three different people in the last week I hadn't seen in years and they all mentioned in all earnestness/shocked that I looked extremely well, I don't think they noticed any issues in posture and as I tried to point out, i'm basically about to bend over in that shot with a pasted on face that makes it look more hunched. it could true that I have posture issues otherwise, but my image is not all what I'm talking about. Here are some exercise pics form another thread.
http://www.rawpaleoforum.com/exercisebodybuilding/today%27s-workout/msg37001/#msg37001
Alas, I had to rent a trunk soon anyway, I'll try to lay the reverse direction this time.
-
If you switched to raw meat instead of protein shakes you'll save your kidneys and your life.
i see no logic whatsoever. it's the total grams of protein that stresses kidneys so what does it matter where that protein comes from.
it's a lose-lose situation man. if you want to be big - you're going to have to die one way or another.
how many 300 pound 80 year olds do you know ?
that's one of the reasons why i want to diet down to 155 lbs - is for health. the less my bodyweight the less stress on my internal organs.
-
Also, many people do steroids without much issue and you can do them relatively safely. This is not an endorsement as nobody here should use them but they aren't as bad as they are made out to be.
that's like saying that it's possible to ride a literbike safely. sure it's possible - if you never make a single mistake you will be just fine. and if you make that mistake - you will be dead or wishing you were never born.
steroids aren't "bad" - they are DANGEROUS. if used correctly you will have no problems. that's a BIG if however.
because most people don't know how to use them correctly. others know but cannot get the drugs they want and are forced to substitute with other more damaging products. yet others like me simply lose control and go on a binge.
you have to realize steroids affect your mind, not just your body, and also your physique affects your mind as well. it becomes a vicious circle - the more drugs you take the bigger you want to be and the bigger you get the more drugs you want to take. pretty soon everything you know about how to use steroids safely goes out the window and you just start using as much as you can afford to buy.
-
Here are some exercise pics form another thread.
http://www.rawpaleoforum.com/exercisebodybuilding/today%27s-workout/msg37001/#msg37001
i think your upper body is about right size. you could use bigger legs though i think.
my favorite ways to exercise legs are deadlifts and bike riding.
i would advise you against pursuing greater upper body bulk. you have a healthy bodyfat percentage but higher than what would be expected from a hollywood star, so you can work on that if you want while keeping overall size constant.
think of Michelangelo's "David" statue as the ideal. compared to him you are the same size, but not as lean.
-
.
Two hundred pounds can be attractive, to me, and some guys don't need to take steroids to do it. If you ate enough raw chicken and raw eggs, I seriously doubt you'd get the stretch marks. It has the right proteins.
-
i see no logic whatsoever. it's the total grams of protein that stresses kidneys so what does it matter where that protein comes from.
it's a lose-lose situation man. if you want to be big - you're going to have to die one way or another.
how many 300 pound 80 year olds do you know ?
that's one of the reasons why i want to diet down to 155 lbs - is for health. the less my bodyweight the less stress on my internal organs.
My grandpa died at almost 100 and he was usually 250 lbs at only 5 foot 3 inches.
Resting Blood Pressure of 135 is so wrong and so unhealthy.
If you went RAW PALEO DIET, you would know that raw protein is different from cooked / processed protein. Your protein shakes are the cause of kidney problems which in turn cause high blood pressure. And that raw protein must be buffered by RAW FAT. So your kidneys survive and thrive.
Unless you experiment for yourself, you don't know yet.
-
think of Michelangelo's "David" statue as the ideal. compared to him you are the same size, but not as lean.
please re-read my original point
http://www.rawpaleoforum.com/exercisebodybuilding/how-big/msg38679/#msg38679
I've already expressed my contentment. My comment was about the numbers you gave. I have not posted pics/links or information about myself to impress anyone, on the contrary to state my opinion that it would still be considered to be underweight and slim. People can dispute the validity of that and that is fine, but surely getting in the 130-150 range, with low body fat especially will be an even further deviation from my current 'underweight' or 'some parts fine others not' status at a fairly dense 160. These to me are just facts, I'm not crying for help here. I've had as I've said literally immeasurable bodyfat percentage (under 2%) and it among many things almost killed me. the Hollywood types are just a rule of comparison of a certain level of fullness (not necessarily fitness) that people are familiar with, not a goal per se. My disagreement in relation to the topic is that I feel that I personally would look better with an added 10-15 lbs -at least- and have basically no preference of how much of that was increased bodyfat or not. I havn't been to a gym in almost 4 years, If anything I've tried to get a little fat into my body and do exercises that keep a small level of fitness going in my comparative lazy lifestyle. I do bike for transport but its actually a pain in the ass for me how much it burns calories so I opt for the bus often. Right now I've just recently mixed it up with cross-fit endurance and serious strength training, so if anything it probably will balance my body out as opposed to getting much larger, but I think any further personal critiques would be better placed in my journal.
-
If you went RAW PALEO DIET, you would know that raw protein is different from cooked / processed protein.
but isn't it true that by the time protein has been absorbed into blood stream it has been reduced to amino acids anyway ?
-
There is more to meat than just protein, and there is more to meat protein than just total protein. There is even more to animal than just meat, there is fat and connective tissue. There is also more to fat than just fat...
-
please re-read my original point
don't take it personally. i am an extremist by nature. my mind tries to take everything to the extreme. in my mind there is simply no such concept as "good enough".
I do bike for transport but its actually a pain in the ass for me how much it burns calories so I opt for the bus often.
yes, low intensity cardio ( commuting ) is not very compatible with the goals you have stated. if you were doing sprints on the bike it would be different. but sprinting on a bike is quite dangerous to the point where its probably not worth it.
ps: always wear a helmet :)
-
There is more to meat than just protein, and there is more to meat protein than just total protein. There is even more to animal than just meat, there is fat and connective tissue. There is also more to fat than just fat...
i am not looking for excuses to avoid eating animal flesh. i WANT to eat it. but i have to look at it rationally. out of 3 options:
1 - protein shakes
2 - raw meat
3 - cooked meat
all 3 have their own risks. anyway this is off topic, let's not derail the thread.
-
You should ask Brock Lesnar about protein shakes, maybe he could show you pictures of his endoscopy with holes in his stomach.
-
i am not looking for excuses to avoid eating animal flesh. i WANT to eat it. but i have to look at it rationally. out of 3 options:
1 - protein shakes
2 - raw meat
3 - cooked meat
all 3 have their own risks. anyway this is off topic, let's not derail the thread.
Seems you are not interested in adopting a RAW PALEO DIET.
If you are not interested in adopting a RAW PALEO DIET,
if you are not choosing option (2) RAW MEAT,
then you are in the WRONG forum.
-
You should ask Brock Lesnar about protein shakes, maybe he could show you pictures of his endoscopy with holes in his stomach.
my doctor told me when i was on steroids ( he knew i was on them because i told him ) that i will have kidney damage from the sheer VOLUME OF EXERCISE i was doing. he knew i was using tons of protein and i was using tons of steroids but he said the real problem was lifting weights in the 300+ pound range for 20 hours a week. he said that all the soreness meant that muscle fragments were floating in my blood eventually reaching kidneys. steroid mega-doses were able to repair the muscle damage in time for the next workout but there was nothing to help other organs deal with the stress overload on the body.
that's why instead of singling out steroids or protein i realized that in the BIG PICTURE it is the unnatural physique itself that was the culprit and i would be hurting my health one way or the other if i tried to maintain it. you can't look like a freak and be healthy.
there are basically 3 ways to get bigger:
1 - take steroids
2 - eat more protein and calories
3 - work out with higher intensity
the problem is EACH of them is detrimental to health. for example:
1 - bad cholesterol ratio, bad blood pressure, prostate enlargement leading to cancer, hair loss, liver damage.
2 - kidney damage, insulin resistance leading to diabetes
3 - kidney damage, high cortisol leading to heart disease, overuse leading to injury
bottom line - NO FREE LUNCH
sure you can be smarter or stupider about either of the 3 so you can do more or less damage with more or less results depending on how intelligent you are but ON THE AVERAGE the more unnatural-looking your GOALS the more damage you will end up doing reaching them
i will give you guys this - protein powders are a relatively recent development so there IS a *risk* or a *chance* that they may in themselves be detrimental to health ( in addition to any detrimental effects of excessive total protein consumption ). because of this i will try to limit my use of them as much as i can, but i don't see at present time any way for myself to discontinue them completely.
-
Seems you are not interested in adopting a RAW PALEO DIET.
If you are not interested in adopting a RAW PALEO DIET,
if you are not choosing option (2) RAW MEAT,
then you are in the WRONG forum.
i am interested in adopting certain raw paleo foods - such as raw eggs. i am looking for balance. i don't believe that any one diet got everything 100% exactly right. some have gotten close ( raw and paleo ones ) while others missed the boat completely ( low fat ) but nobody got it 100% right.
before coming here i was on raw foods ( vegetarian ) forums for a few weeks. they banned me for promoting protein shakes. they never did manage to convince me that the best diet for humans was grass, but i did pick up a lot of tips from them - because of my participation on those forums i now use Hemp and Chia seeds blended in a Vita-Mix several times a day.
i intend to "take home" some foods, concepts and ideas from this forum as well. i do *not* intend to suddenly forget everything i learned in the last 30 years of my life though and adopt the raw paleo diet without any modifications.
-
but.. what... The palaeolithic diet is not named after someone, it's not a thing someone came up with and sold. The palaeolithic diet is 100% right. Not that anyone of us is eating the palaeolithic diet, we're just improving our health by following its' principles... It is the based on the principles of evolution and adaptation, of nature. How can you even compare it to vegetarianism? There is no sense to say that our diet should be of grass... Our head is far from the ground, we have one stomach etc... It would seem that you do not understand what the Palaeolithic diet really is... Vegetarians like to come up with these new super-foods all the time at random, because none ever give them what they want... What is the reasoning behind Hemp and Chia seeds being beneficial to you? There is none... What is the reasoning behind the Palaeolithic diet? It is its own reasoning...
-
but.. what... The palaeolithic diet is not named after someone, it's not a thing someone came up with and sold. The palaeolithic diet is 100% right. Not that anyone of us is eating the palaeolithic diet, we're just improving our health by following its' principles... It is the based on the principles of evolution and adaptation, of nature. How can you even compare it to vegetarianism? There is no sense to say that our diet should be of grass... Our head is far from the ground, we have one stomach etc... It would seem that you do not understand what the Palaeolithic diet really is... Vegetarians like to come up with these new super-foods all the time at random, because none ever give them what they want... What is the reasoning behind Hemp and Chia seeds being beneficial to you? There is none... What is the reasoning behind the Palaeolithic diet? It is its own reasoning...
any religious fanatic can come up with ways to explain why his religion is true and other religions are evil and false.
and yet statistically agnostic people have highest IQ and religious people lowest ( regardless of religion ) while atheists are in the middle.
i prefer to stay agnostic on this issue. you *may* be right. you could also be wrong.
think of how many things the humanity was able to improve since paleo days - roads, cars, houses, computers. yes it is true that modern diet is utter SH1T compared to paleo diet - there is no argument about that. but that doesn't mean that all of our knowledge and technology COULD NOT be used to IMPROVE UPON the paleo diet.
yes the humans evolved to conform their bodies to the paleo diet, but the paleo diet did not evolve to conform to the human body ! today we have the option to do that - to "evolve" our diet to match our bodies needs. unfortunately we don't know what our needs are that's why all modern diets fail. but that only proves that we don't know anything - it doesn't *prove* that we know paleo is ideal.
get it ? :)
paleo is not the ultimate destination - it is the logical starting point. you start with a paleo diet because quite frankly there is nowhere else to logically start. i have no doubt that paleo can be improved upon. i just don't know HOW to do it. i also know that in the past all attempts to improve our diets have made it worse. but as Morpheus said to Neo "where others have failed you will succeed" HAHAHAHA ! ! !
-
Raw Paleo is never about religious fanaticism, this board is about GETTING HEALTHY RESULTS.
A good number of us turned to raw paleo because we were sick on the "other" diets.
With your current resting blood pressure of 135 = this is a total disaster and one you have to solve quickly.
Whatever you are doing now is dangerous for your health given that blood pressure.
i am interested in adopting certain raw paleo foods - such as raw eggs. i am looking for balance. i don't believe that any one diet got everything 100% exactly right. some have gotten close ( raw and paleo ones ) while others missed the boat completely ( low fat ) but nobody got it 100% right.
before coming here i was on raw foods ( vegetarian ) forums for a few weeks. they banned me for promoting protein shakes. they never did manage to convince me that the best diet for humans was grass, but i did pick up a lot of tips from them - because of my participation on those forums i now use Hemp and Chia seeds blended in a Vita-Mix several times a day.
i intend to "take home" some foods, concepts and ideas from this forum as well. i do *not* intend to suddenly forget everything i learned in the last 30 years of my life though and adopt the raw paleo diet without any modifications.
-
Raw Paleo is never about religious fanaticism, this board is about GETTING HEALTHY RESULTS.
A good number of us turned to raw paleo because we were sick on the "other" diets.
With your current resting blood pressure of 135 = this is a total disaster and one you have to solve quickly.
Whatever you are doing now is dangerous for your health given that blood pressure.
i'm 29 now and my blood pressure is like i said significantly lower than it was when i was 23.
there is zero reason to believe that my current diet caused my high blood pressure.
now when i developed this problem originally i was doing a lot of unhealthy things at the same time - steroids, stimulants, very large doses of protein, and extreme training. which one did it ? i don't know.
i agree with you that protein could be a contributing factor, and as precautionary measure i will try to reduce it.
just stop talking about it. my grandfather had high blood pressure and he never exercised and barely had any proteins in his diet. his blood pressure was extremely high during his last few years ( going up to as much as 180 at times ) and in the end he died from something else altogether - prostate cancer.
ok it's time for my bike ride.
-
Hmmmm Neuro I am just not quite sure what to think of you yet :D (no offense of course)
In one hand I think its possible you never gave eating properly and training properly a good chance, and went straight into drugs and supplements. It's possible your beef is with drugs and supplements, and not with being big or lifting weights.
The reason I mention this is because you mention strange things (could be a coincidence). But all the serious lifters I know have stats they are very proud of, even if it was in the past of the squat, bench, and deadlift...and you give me a stat on pullups. Maybe you are just trying to give something everyones familiar with, I don't know but thats fine.
Then you mention going to your doctor and he has you convinced its the WEIGHT your lifting is whats the big problem. To be honest this is the first time I have ever heard anything about that and it sounds kind of silly. I know many many people out there including myself that lift weights well over 300lbs every workout, and everyone I know is natural, with no health problems.
But I will say its very hard to get the whole picture over the internet, and things are not always what they seem. I just hope that your not blaming the wrong things.
-
Hmmmm Neuro I am just not quite sure what to think of you yet :D (no offense of course)
In one hand I think its possible you never gave eating properly and training properly a good chance, and went straight into drugs and supplements. It's possible your beef is with drugs and supplements, and not with being big or lifting weights.
The reason I mention this is because you mention strange things (could be a coincidence). But all the serious lifters I know have stats they are very proud of, even if it was in the past of the squat, bench, and deadlift...and you give me a stat on pullups. Maybe you are just trying to give something everyones familiar with, I don't know but thats fine.
Then you mention going to your doctor and he has you convinced its the WEIGHT your lifting is whats the big problem. To be honest this is the first time I have ever heard anything about that and it sounds kind of silly. I know many many people out there including myself that lift weights well over 300lbs every workout, and everyone I know is natural, with no health problems.
But I will say its very hard to get the whole picture over the internet, and things are not always what they seem. I just hope that your not blaming the wrong things.
what i could lift is simply irrelevant because you were not there to see it.
i don't want to be like an old fart that tells kids "when i was your age so and so".
90% of your friends that are "natural" are on steroids. all of my friends in the gym were on steroids and all of them said they were natural. they also all sold steroids to each other.
this last clown i was friends with ( i am not at that gym any more, otherwise would still be friends with him ) was 29 years old and claimed that he started working out at 28. he said he was a natural. he was deadlifting 600 pounds and his face was BLACK from acne. natural my ass. also when we talked we talked only about steroids. all he wanted to know was more information about steroids - all the while repeating about how he doesn't use them.
when a guy tells another guy in the gym "i am natural" it's like when a guy tells his girlfriend "i love you". it doesn't mean anything.
-
I think you have me mistaken for somebody that has not been around lifting much. I know for a fact who is natural and who is not in my group, not only because of being friends in and outside of the gym, these same friends are competition in tested powerlifting divisions. Some also do not compete in tested divisions. I have a friend that is closing in on a legit 600lb raw competition bench, I would not believe it either until I knew him well and went to tested powerlifting meets with him. In the same group we have a guy who is 165lbs closing in on a 400lb touch and go bench.
I also know a lot of guys who are on gear who are nowhere near those strength levels. Point being, strong is relative, and you don't need to be on stuff to be strong. Strongest? yes, but its unfair to call somebody out on drugs because they have a 600lb deadlift--there are lots of guys who have hit 600+ deadlift without drugs.
edit: just to add, in groups of powerlifting--we all know who is on stuff and who isn't, its not a secret. Bodybuilding is totally different.
edit2: wanted to also add--you have a good point though, and I know your view to be true 99% of the time... some guys just wont admit it, especially bodybuilders and gym rats. They all want you to think they got to where they are naturally, and its rarely not a lie.
-
yes the humans evolved to conform their bodies to the paleo diet, but the paleo diet did not evolve to conform to the human body ! today we have the option to do that - to "evolve" our diet to match our bodies needs. unfortunately we don't know what our needs are that's why all modern diets fail. but that only proves that we don't know anything - it doesn't *prove* that we know paleo is ideal.
HAHAHAHA ! ! !
ok, I'm with you here somewhat, and disregard that other nonsense about seeds, as obviously those have been existentence before humans ever walked on two legs, and as a food source for humans dating back at least as far back as thousand of years before civilization. Whether they are ideal nutrition is debatable however, and there are some heavy (founded) biases against plant proteins here.
you are totally right in that a raw paleo diet will not ensure anybody health per se, but most people are clearly here because it has given them some results at least thus far (alas there are some morons who get stuck in the theory of it, like any other alternative methodology as being the right and only way even in spite of often misfiring on day to day practice and results)
however, what I was trying to get at earlier is that even though you are recognizing some things that are needed to be done with your exercise (rightly or wrongly), you are still acting under the same mentality of unbalanced priorities as the steroid dayz. I don't know how accurate GS is on your blood pressure, but in general he is right in terms of that and other issues being the focus of attention and healing rather than bodyfat and weight-loss. I tend to think he's right on proteins not at all being similar, but the other thing about RAF is its really the only approach where one can healthfully eat a high fat diet with a moderate or low protein level. If anything, since you are a big guy and don't care about maintaining weight, you are at an advantage in taking it easy of yourself and concentrating on health.
-
I think you have me mistaken for somebody that has not been around lifting much. I know for a fact who is natural and who is not in my group, not only because of being friends in and outside of the gym, these same friends are competition in tested powerlifting divisions. Some also do not compete in tested divisions. I have a friend that is closing in on a legit 600lb raw competition bench, I would not believe it either until I knew him well and went to tested powerlifting meets with him. In the same group we have a guy who is 165lbs closing in on a 400lb touch and go bench.
I also know a lot of guys who are on gear who are nowhere near those strength levels. Point being, strong is relative, and you don't need to be on stuff to be strong. Strongest? yes, but its unfair to call somebody out on drugs because they have a 600lb deadlift--there are lots of guys who have hit 600+ deadlift without drugs.
edit: just to add, in groups of powerlifting--we all know who is on stuff and who isn't, its not a secret. Bodybuilding is totally different.
edit2: wanted to also add--you have a good point though, and I know your view to be true 99% of the time... some guys just wont admit it, especially bodybuilders and gym rats. They all want you to think they got to where they are naturally, and its rarely not a lie.
i was chronically overtrained. i could have been much stronger if i knew about periodization etc. also i was a bodybuilder, not a powerlifter although my training was somewhat powerlifter-like.
most my lifts were quite weak. my squat was a nonexistent. but i was quite strong on chin-ups, on shoulder press ( 140 lb dumbbells for 10 reps, or 150 lb dumbbells for 2 or 3 reps, my working weight was 130 ) and on bent over rows ( 5 plates per side for a few reps once, 4 plates was my working weight ). i also did 7 plates on the icarian T-Bar machine for reps.
so my lats were always my strongest point - they were also the first muscle i started training all the way back as a kid. i was overweight as a kid in USSR and i was the ONLY overweight kid in my class. most my classmates could do chin ups but i couldn't due to my weight. i was attending a gym at age 11 or 12 where i would swim laps ( to lose weight ) and do pull downs so i could learn to do chin ups. but swimming in itself works lats too, and later on i was on a high school swimming team. so my lats got consistent training since age 11 or so while for example i did not start doing squats and deadlifts until age 18 or so ( my parents told me i would not grow up vertically if i did them as a kid ). and in case of squats i stopped soon after i started because they were impinging some nerve in my neck.
as for shoulders - steroids help with that a lot. my back strength was quite good before steroids, and remained decent after steroids as well. my shoulder strength was 100% steroidal though. it came and left with them.
i don't remember the details of my routine but it was something like 2 - 3 hours a day 6 - 7 days a week with very long breaks between sets - like 5 minutes. i would do sets of 5 - 6 reps and i would do about 3 sets per exercise. i would train at about 90% of my max all the time.
also i did a lot of pyramids. that is for example i would start with 60lb dumbbells, work up to 130 ones and then, work back down to 80 lb ones. i would not go to failure until i would hit the highest weight i was going to do that day ( say 130 lbs ) but once i hit that weight i would go to failure on every set so to failure on 130, then to failure on 110, then to failure on 80 or so.
i really took overtraining to another level :)
but since i was always on 2 or 3 pills of ephedrine in the gym i didn't feel overtrained.
i did not do any cardio and very little ab work. for abs i would do sit ups on an decline bench with either a 45 lb plate in front of me or a 10 or 25 lb plate behind the head. i did not do many reps. i did not believe in reps back then - i believed that growth comes from tension.
my highest one-arm pull down at 220 lbs actually came a few years AFTER quitting steroids when i have already lost half of the muscle. i managed to increase my strength while losing muscle simply because by that time i understood overtraining.
when on steroids i did not understand overtraining at all. one time i had to spend a week in the hospital and it was driving me insane that i couldn't be in the gym. as soon as they let me out i went straight to the gym and set personal records on everything i lifted that day. i thought it was "strange" that my strength increased across the board after a week in bed under an IV. of course that's what was SUPPOSED to happen, but i didn't know it then.
wouldn't it be nice if you could live twice and apply everything you learned in the first life to your second ? i learned a lot about this sport over the years but i no longer have the health to try what i know on myself any more.
-
concentrating on health.
i don't believe in health for health's sake, or for the sake of living longer. to me health is only a means to achieve higher quality of life. quality over quantity.
what changed in recent years is now i no longer think that quality of life is a function of muscle size. now i think it is a function of energy levels and having a physique that is lean - the two being closely related.
you see kids growing up want only one thing - to get bigger faster. older people also want only one thing - and that's to be younger. to be leaner and have greater energy IS in a way to be younger - and that's what i am working on now. that's why i cycle 15 - 20 miles per day now at fairly high intensity, instead of lifting weights at the gym.
-
i don't believe in health for health's sake, or for the sake of living longer. to me health is only a means to achieve higher quality of life. quality over quantity.
what changed in recent years is now i no longer think that quality of life is a function of muscle size. now i think it is a function of energy levels and having a physique that is lean - the two being closely related.
Of course, but what I'm saying is you seem to be just shifting within the same paradigm. In a sense this is like your average inactive person, thinking if they spend all their time on a treadmill and avoiding high fat snacks that they will look younger and feel more energetic. Just a bit wishful especially when people cross over into some kind of illness of injury. There are going to have to be other diet and lifestyle factors and rest involved for any serious recovery. You might associate your problems with past types of activity, and thats fine, no one knows better than you on that I suppose, but just shifting your activity is not (likely) going to be the panacea to your problems. So in short, it makes way more sense to just halt most (or all) activity and rest, eat healthful food ( ditch all the performance related 'food) and try to heal your injuries and health issues, don't punish yourself into some body-makeup that statistically has better health or whatever using the same tactics and chemicals and protein excess. That makes no sense and sounds alot like the gym-rats you speak of's wives. Plus, losing weight on raw is just plain easy, hell I could probably be satisfied on 1400 cals a day, I eat like its my friggen job.
-
Of course, but what I'm saying is you seem to be just shifting within the same paradigm. In a sense this is like your average inactive person, thinking if they spend all their time on a treadmill and avoiding high fat snacks that they will look younger and feel more energetic. Just a bit wishful especially when people cross over into some kind of illness of injury. There are going to have to be other diet and lifestyle factors and rest involved for any serious recovery. You might associate your problems with past types of activity, and thats fine, no one knows better than you on that I suppose, but just shifting your activity is not (likely) going to be the panacea to your problems. So in short, it makes way more sense to just halt most (or all) activity and rest, eat healthful food ( ditch all the performance related 'food) and try to heal your injuries and health issues, don't punish yourself into some body-makeup that statistically has better health or whatever using the same tactics and chemicals and protein excess. That makes no sense and sounds alot like the gym-rats you speak of's wives. Plus, losing weight on raw is just plain easy, hell I could probably be satisfied on 1400 cals a day, I eat like its my friggen job.
i know you're right. its a psychological problem for me. i just see myself as an "athlete" in my own mind, and to me that means doing all those things - train, supplement etc. it's hard to stay perfectly objective. most people are driven to some extent by their own self-image.
my self image is a product of all those years when i felt competitive with others going into a gym for a workout, which is probably from about age 15 to 25 or so. that's why i am trying to tell you people not to get competitive in the gym, not think of a workout as a war ( like many do to psych themselves ), not make friends with other crazy folks who scream while lifting etc. just try to maintain sanity.