Alright you stupid fucking first-year lifting assholes. I'm tired of hearing all of your bullshit memescience
I've been on here for the better part of 3 years, and I have to say I've never seen Veeky Forums this bad of a condition. I've thought I heard it all, but guess what, you faggots all proved me wrong. Let's start with your most bullshit arguments
>Bodyweight exercises are fine for people trying to "tone" The rule to all fitness is progressive overload and persistence. Bodyweight exercises are shit because there is no way to progressive overload. Sure, you can do more reps and eventually get strong enough to do even more reps, but this doesn't train the muscles specifically. It trains endurance. If you could somehow train an exercise for a certain amount of reps and make it harder next session without increasing repetitions, than that is a good enough exercise to be able to be used in a routine. Individuals that can do 100 push ups would very rarely get any progress from doing 105 push ups This is because the muscle has not been fatigued until the last 10 repetitions. For any routine to build muscle, it would have to fatigue the muscles to near exhaustion 3-5 times a session. The total amount of time for this would increase in such a way that it'll be difficult for any adult to complete.
>PPL for beginners looking to lift weights No you stupid faggots. A routine is not only the exercises and the sets. A routine is so much more. Routines are supposed to have the progression of weights be mathematically defined.
Every PPL routine I've seen had absolutely no progression recommended. Which is fine for intermediate lifters as they can more effectively gauge fatigueness for their body and determine if some day was a good workout. Contrast that with Starting Strength and it enforces that you increase the weight on the barbell by a certain amount each session. This would allow beginners to effectively overload their muscles to GUARANTEE muscular fatigueness.
>Vegan bullshit Listen you bullshit vegans. Look at the name of this board. It's "Fitness", isn't it? Therefore it must be assumed that any discussion in this board has to be directly related to fitness. There was not 1 (ONE) argument on this board that has dealt with veganism being better for fitness than other diets.
And as for the health aspect of veganism. There has not been a single study out there that I read that has effectively proven that vegans are inherently more healthy. There have been studies that have correlated the two. But the correlation of the two is often of the result of a third factor that has not been effectively controlled against. The simplest example that I could give is from "The China Study" itself. >Body weight, associated with animal protein intake, was associated with more cancer and more coronary heart disease. It seems that being bigger, and presumably better, comes with very high costs. (Page 102) Note how Campbell associates body weight with cancer. Which is true. But he also associates bodyweight with animal proteins.
Now since we're all on a Veeky Forumsness forum, I'll assume you all know how calories work. But just in case you vegans are brain damaged from your nutritional deficiencies. The over consumption of foods causes increased bodyweight. And hence when individuals over consume, they would consume more animal proteins than individuals that don't over consume.
If you're still too damaged to follow. "Animal proteins have not, and will never cause obesity" Look up literally ANY article criticizing "The China Study" and you would find HUNDREDS of examples of incorrect mythology from self proclaimed vegetarians/vegans deniseminger.com/2010/07/07/the-china-study-fact-or-fallac/
Christian Barnes
>Look at the name of this board. It's "Fitness", isn't it? Therefore it must be assumed that any discussion in this board has to be directly related to fitness. There was not 1 (ONE) argument on this board that has dealt with veganism being better for fitness than other diets. >And as for the health aspect of veganism. There has not been a single study out there that I read that has effectively proven that vegans are inherently more healthy. Cardiovascular health is an aspect of fitness, vegan diets are low in saturated fat and contain inherently zero cholesterol, dietary cholesterol and saturated fats DO raise serum cholesterol, whether you like it or not, there are tons upon tons of studies on that and the opposition studies are always flawed in design (I dare you to post a study that proves me wrong), and having high blood cholesterol is detrimental to cardiovascular health, or "fitness" Furthermore, eating cow, chicken period and baby cow formula promotes inflammation, while eating beans instead inhibits inflammation due to antioxidant content On the other hand, there is literally nothung inherently wrong with veganism, as long as you watch what you eat, just like with any diet.
Ryder Brown
>Every PPL routine I've seen had absolutely no progression recommended. Which is fine for intermediate lifters as they can more effectively gauge fatigueness for their body and determine if some day was a good workout. >Contrast that with Starting Strength and it enforces that you increase the weight on the barbell by a certain amount each session. This would allow beginners to effectively overload their muscles to GUARANTEE muscular fatigueness. Are you deliberately being this stupid?
Ethan Davis
>Cardiovascular health is an aspect of fitness Oh, thank you for reminding me of something else to rant about. But first the rest of your question
>Furthermore, eating cow, chicken period and baby cow formula promotes inflammation, while eating beans instead inhibits inflammation due to antioxidant content Post a single study confirming this
>On the other hand, there is literally nothung inherently wrong with veganism, as long as you watch what you eat, just like with any diet. Sure if you're okay with injecting B12
Not an argument
Ayden Martinez
>Cardio Listen to me you dumbshits and listen carefully. Exercising trains every single muscle that is properly fatigued enough in the workout. In the cases of strength training, that includes the heart. That is why every single study on the effect of strength training on VO2 max shows that it has a positive correlation
Unless you are some sort of athlete training in a competitive sport, you do not need to supplement your training with cardio. Your strength training has you covered, enough to let you live a happy enough life. If on the off chance you would ever need to run a mile in less than 10 minutes, with enough persistence in strength training, you would be able to do so.
The implication that cardio is not fitness related is wrong and you should unironically suicide grip bench 4 plate with oiled hands.
Hudson Ramirez
When did I say that cardio is not fitness related? I''m suggesting you have increased VO2 max and therefore increased capabilities in cardio by preforming strength training.
Cardio is still important in athletic conditioning of actual athletes in sports such as Football. But the average individual would see more increase in athleticism by strength training alone, than supplementing cardio with strength training (because the recovery aspect of strength training is so demanding that cardio would delay it, screwing up progression overload). Not only would you be able to run a mile in less than 10 minutes, but you'd also be able to deadlift 400 lbs.
Jonathan Howard
>When did I say that cardio is not fitness related? >you do not need to supplement your training with cardio.
Austin Reyes
But you don't because strength training increases VO2 max. Disprove this
Zachary Watson
You see the issue with this is a 10 minute mile is a god awful running time. I have literally power walked that for shiggles.
Nevertheless, burden of proof lies with you, buddy. I can't say I've ever seen someone who doesn't run manage to run an actually impressive time, regardless of their performance in the gym.
Has cardio literally brain damaged you or something?
Eli Watson
I didn't deny that, don't strawman.
Ryder Ross
Wtf did "burden of proof" mean Burden of proof that strength training increases VO2 max and therefore can assist in helping an individual run a 10 minute mile?
The issue with "strawman" fallacy is that you haven't written your argument yet, which leads me to shadow boxing what I think your thoughts are.
Are you upset that in virtually every aspect in life, having a sub 10 minute mile (or what you consider is impressive) is far inferior than having a 500 lb deadlift? Strength by far is a far better increase of quality of life than running really fast for 6 minutes.
Connor Wood
>completely ignores the point I'm hinging on >continues strawman argument
Whatever son.
Jaxson Sullivan
You're dealing with two different posters.
One of them is a half asleep night shifter trying to stay awake.
Jack Gray
Now I'm just shadow boxing against two individuals? I still have no idea what any of your arguments are.
Jonathan Sanders
Squatting heavy is as beneficial to VO2 as sprinting fast is to increasing your squat total. That is, not much at all.
Also, a sub 10 mile is shit compared to a 5 lp8 DL because a sub 10 mile is shit period. Comparing it to a sub 5.30 mile is more fair, and in that case both athletes are equally invested in "fitness" >The issue with "strawman" fallacy is that you haven't written your argument yet, which leads me to shadow boxing what I think your thoughts are. >The implication that cardio is not fitness related is wrong >Cardiovascular health is an aspect of fitness
Samuel Sanchez
10 minute run guy here.
My only discrepancy is the use of 10 minute mile being used as some sort of metric as if it were to be impressive. Shit, when I started running after years of sedentary fatassery, I clocked 10 minute mile and dropped to 8ish minutes after only a month of training.
Yes, your vo2 will go up with weight lifting. If you're not out of breath from a set, you're doing it all wrong. But if you're going to use that as your metric, use that.
I've no discrepancy with the rest of the information posted, and honestly couldn't be arsed to gather enough energy to put together an argument if I did.
Juan Butler
>Squatting heavy is as beneficial to VO2 as sprinting fast is to increasing your squat total. That is, not much at all. Maybe you're just too dense to open the link and follow the references. Okay, here >This training also elicits an improvement of VO2max when the initial VO2max at start of the training is lower compared to average values of VO2max for the corresponding age. The RT-induced increase in VO2max may be associated with an improvement in the ability of oxygen to be utilized in hypertrophied muscles. Thus, RT can be expected to improve concurrently both muscular (muscle hypertrophy and functional ability) and cardiovascular (VO2max) fitnesses within a single mode of resistance training when young and old persons have initially low fitness levels
>Comparing it to a sub 5.30 mile is more fair, and in that case both athletes are equally invested in "fitness" The point is a majority of individuals would never need the cardiovascular endurance to run a sub 5.30 mile. However strength is an important aspect in life and being able to lift 500lbs off the ground is a useful benefit from day to day. Something as simple as grocery shopping becomes much easier.
The only time cardio is even remotely necessary is if an individual enjoys the practice of running long distances, sprinting in short bursts, or is competing in a sport where such cardiovascular endurance is preferred.
Maybe I should be more clear. I don't think that people should stop doing cardio. I think that people should focus on their goals and how to achieve them. And if people's goals are to have good cardiovascular health and being stronger (and hence muscular), then you are better suited trying to achieve your goal by doing solely strength training.
My goal was not to set a 10 minute mile as some sort of standard. My suggestion is the above. Strength training increases cardiovascular health by itself
Lucas Harris
Fair.
Alexander Wilson
>Bodyweight exercises are shit because there is no way to progressive overload. but that's false, maniplating leverage increases resistance. EG: Diamond pushups are harder than regular pushups, decline pushups are harder than diamond pushups, so forth I did bodyweight for a year or two while i was a rock climber, it's definitely got nothing on weight training but it's a good idea for people who just want ottermode, or as you say, to "tone". >PPL for beginners looking to lift weights You raise a good point, but surely beginners can figure out to just add 2.5kg a week or 5kg for lower body if they're able to finish every set? >Vegan bullshit agree completely on this. I'm pretty sure most of the vegan threads are bait threads. I don't really give a fuck if i live to 80 or 90 or 100 anyway, am I going to be fucking qt's in the retirement home or something? what?
Carson Mitchell
>Diamond push ups ate harder than regular pushups Switching to diamond push ups from regular push ups because it's harder is like switching to lateral raises from overhead press. It's harder because it uses less total muscle. While in any other situation, the recommended action would be to use the exercise that trains the most amount of muscle. IE doing chin ups instead of pull ups This become apparent when dealing activities for the legs. Other than air squats and that dumb stuff where you put your back against the wall and sit. The legs are such a strong muscle that you're not really holding it justice by leaving it solely for your body weight >but it's a good idea for people who just want ottermode This may be the only redeeming quality of bodyweight exercises. However the average man should not settle for being as small as ottermode. Maybe it's just my body dismorphia speaking, but I consider that to be very suboptimal
>surely beginners can figure out to just add... Beginners and often even intermediates are unable to reliably determine whether a particular weight is heavy. If you've ever coached a beginner, you'd know that. And that's not to be disparaging.
This is linked with RPE, rate of perceived exertion or something like that. When you ask a beginner to rate a particular s in terms of heaviness, beginners would always pick a number greater than 8, even though in reality it was more like a 5 or 6. This leads to some problems in picking out a suitable weight set/progression for beginners. A simple "pick out the weight that is the hardest weight you can do" paradigm doesn't work because beginners are just unable to listen to their body enough to say "This is too light."
Contrast that with starting strength, and the program works every single time Start out with whatever feels comfortable. And every single session, I don't care what happens, increase that weight next season. If you fail you're doing something incorrectly
David Smith
OP before you post ANY advice you should post a pic of your body first.
I 100% guarantee you are a lardass that goes to the gym for 40 mins 3 times a week and thinks he is fit.
Any reply from you that doesn't have a pic of your body attached is effectively null.
Kevin Foster
m8 I've never posted pics here and I don't plan to
Also not an argument. Trappychan had solid advice but looked like a chick
Michael Torres
>Bodyweight exercises are shit because there is no way to progressive overload what is leverage. also weighted vests exist
Zachary Bailey
Then it's effectively /thread
This is a fitness board, people post their bodies all the time, you refusing to do so means that your advice is horseshit.
And infact i actually bothered to read it and it's the same Veeky Forums mantra shit that people try and then look like shit.
Jordan Mitchell
do not invest for bodyweight trainning please
Nicholas Morgan
Completely off topic maybe, but I'm glad to see an actual /fit related discussion on this board for a change
Jose Morales
>promotes SS >refuses to post body confirmed fat 'powerlifter'
No reason not to post body. Blur face, remove EXIF and post it, faggo
I actually agree on bodyweight exercises and vegan threads, but if you are going to talk big you have to post your fat, SS-developed body.
Brayden Parker
Fully autistic post. Just missing the fedora tipping
Dominic Howard
>Trappychan had solid advice but looked like a chick I don't know if you're up to date on plg drama but trappychan was actually some girl's insane ex (a BR dude called rafael) who was using her photos to pretend to be a chick
Parker Campbell
>I've been on here for the better part of 3 years You are not qualified to comment on the state of fit if you're that new. You probably don't even know who zyzz is.
I'm going to let you in on a secret: nothing ever changes, you just haven't been around long enough to see everything repeat itself yet.
Austin Richardson
The whole idea that lifting, even intensely, for 3 years makes one an expert is pretty laughable.
There's so much broscience and life mistakes you have to make to learn what works for you, but it doesn't qualify you to determine what is best for others. Captain noodle may progress better on SS, where fatty mc chub chub will benefit better from cardio and PPL because he'll be seeing results in his appearance, which will then motivate him to lift heavier and pick a strength program.
Anyway, if you don't have a bachelor's in exercise science, it's kind of like pissing in the wind to give people advice. You could be the old fogie in the gym with all your life experiences, but people will still ignore reasonable advice because of something that was said in an article online.
