another article about slow lifting

[horsemom2]

http://www.ediets.com/news/article.c...rticle_id=7202

[Mindi]

But I love it!

Lack of cardio, IMO, is a GOOD THING!

[blueskies]

Very interesting article. And I like that there was a balanced approach with the rebuttal comment right after the article.

I did a "SuperSlow"-style training regimen about 2 years ago using Ellington Darden's Body Defining book. Let me tell you, it was not a fun way to exercise! Darden even admits to this in the Q&A section of the book. I did get muscle sculpting results from it, but was constantly hungry, hated drinking all the water required and was basically not very happy for the 6 weeks I performed the routine. Perhaps this kind of training is best done in a gym, with support from a trainer.

After trying to do an aerobics routine after the 6 weeks with Darden's method, I was distressed to find out that I lost a great deal of my original aerobic capacity. It came back after about a month but it was definitely a struggle.

[Sue B]

Looks like the "super slow" method is getting the same publicity blitz that the "Escape Your Shape" guy got a few years back. At least this article has a rebuttal. I hate it when fitness mags print up some bestseller hype to make it look like the new gospel, which is one reason I no longer subscribe to any fitness mags.

[Jane P.]

I really feel strongly that I can't put my heart and blood vessel health at risk. I'm at high risk for cardiovascular disease so that aspect of fitness is very important to me.

That said, I am intrigued by different methods of weight training, everything from Pilates to super slow. I doubt that I'll convert to one type of training and never do anything else, but it's worth
a six to twelve week tryout.

[Mindi]

Take a read through "The BodyRX" by Dr. Scott Connelly and read his explanation on heart health and weight training. You may be surprised at what you read.

[hch]

No one's described Adam Zickerman's appearance on Crossfire with Denise Austin; did anyone here catch it?

My thoughts on the article:

- I'll have to see more evidence before I go along with the "no [separate] cardio" thing. I do interval cardio and am also looking into other cardio options to add to the mix (for example, NIA; I'm actually much more interested in movement, awareness, and stuff, but will appreciate any cardiovascular benefits that may tag along with those ).

BTW, I don't much like cardio either--more precisely, I like the other things I do much better--and tend to package it along with something else to give it more of a "point." Examples are a challenge (as with intervals), training (I'm considering trying, at an amateur level, some endurance activity, and also working on my running speed), relaxation and other mental benefits (recreation, as in hiking, or being mindful of my body while doing something), or another activity (as with movement in NIA or even with some types of yoga). I'm not convinced yet that I can package it along with weights . I'm glad that interval training is a good thing and would call doing straight cardio, only for the sake of cardio and not at all for the sake of anything else, "eating my vegetables"--if I hated vegetables.

How separable is aerobic endurance itself from cardiovascular health? Whatever the answer is, if you're training in an endurance activity, you'll probably not want to drop it altogether.

- I hate the hyping too--maybe it makes for more eye-catching headlines and livelier conversation, but it may also link the anti-cardio thing with the weights program in many people's minds. I am happier that the people featured here are refreshingly less strident than the official SuperSlow(R) group, but even so there's something that's not quite right.

- Oddly enough, what he says about cardio and calorie-burning echoes older things I've read about weights. A few older books I've seen have said that weight training is marginal for weight loss ("fat loss" not having made its grand entrance yet) because running, for example, burns much more calories while you're doing it. That statement ignores other effects that weights have after the workout. Similarly, Zickerman's statement goes the other way.

Being more "both-and" than "either-or," I consider the irony delicious.

- I do appreciate, though, that weight training is getting more respect for overall health and its own special benefits than it used to.

- I do not endorse the questionable grammar in the "ten commandments" ("you mayest"--oh, please), either.