2008 Woodie Awards
Females and free weights
Matt Karendal
Issue date: 2/26/08 Section: Life
Mary commits to her body. Her consistency in the gym is unquestionable. Her diet is wholesome. Though routine trips to the recreation center resulted in an initial physique change, Mary's body is not quite the glowing, healthy, toned visage that is her goal. Her primary training method involves long sessions on cardio machines and arbitrary selection and application of machine training. We must, however, question whether the methods used are applicable to the goal desired.
Many people choose machine weights for their supposed safety advantages compared to free weights, along with the simplicity of use. Although a regimen incorporating cardio sessions and machine weights appears to be effective, a closer look will find that machines are less effective and much more dangerous than machine manufacturers and popular conception would like you to believe.
Aside from injuries that can be attributed to faulty overconfidence inspired by machines, there are other safety risks. Machines limit load to fewer joints, which in turn places a greater load on the joint(s) exposed.
The free-standing squat involves three joints (hip, knee and ankle), whereas the seated knee extension constrains the body to only one joint (the knee). In producing a comparable level of exercise over the same range of movement, this machine increases forces across the knee.
Furthermore, machines often limit the user to a seated position, which imposes a greater load on the lumbar spinal discs. Simply sitting with the back maintaining its neutral curvatures increases lumbar disc pressure by about 40 percent, according to a 1984 study by Chaffin and Anderson. This stress on the back becomes much greater when resistance is imposed. Also, one is unable to absorb any shock loading by flexing the knees, hips or ankles, as in the case when standing.
With the vast amounts of stress capable of being exerted by a machine, an examination of the training safety of machines is in order. Many machines force the user to initiate the movement from the biomechanically least efficient and potentially most dangerous position for the joint involved in the movement. Thus, it is safe to say that any stress imposed on the body when using a seated machine will amplify the possible danger to joints and to the spinal cord.
The benefits of free weights to either the female, average gym attendee or elite athlete are tremendous. Foremost among the attributes developed are the muscle's ability to sense their position in relation to each other (proprioception). When a load is imposed on the trainee through a barbell or dumbbell, there is no physical guide to the initiation or termination of the movement, so the trainee must rely on proprioception. Along with this development comes the introduction of the stabilizer muscles, which exert force to maintain balance under load.
The last issue to address is the specific regimen to which to adhere. The number of free weight training options available can make things confusing to the novice trainee.
First, lift heavy. Insignificant loads, less than 40 percent of a one-rep max, will impose no positive training effect. Forget about utilizing the five-pound weights for marathon arm sessions. Forget popular conceptions concerning a female's supposed ability to develop muscle mass at a spectacular rate, resulting in a bulky figure. Significant muscle mass takes years to develop, and to think otherwise insults any trainee with a modicum of experience. No one gets muscular overnight.
Free weights are a viable and excellent option for the female trainee, in sharp contrast to the negligible benefits offered by machine training.
For questions about fitness and healthy living, email at Matt6687@gmail.com.
Many people choose machine weights for their supposed safety advantages compared to free weights, along with the simplicity of use. Although a regimen incorporating cardio sessions and machine weights appears to be effective, a closer look will find that machines are less effective and much more dangerous than machine manufacturers and popular conception would like you to believe.
Aside from injuries that can be attributed to faulty overconfidence inspired by machines, there are other safety risks. Machines limit load to fewer joints, which in turn places a greater load on the joint(s) exposed.
The free-standing squat involves three joints (hip, knee and ankle), whereas the seated knee extension constrains the body to only one joint (the knee). In producing a comparable level of exercise over the same range of movement, this machine increases forces across the knee.
Furthermore, machines often limit the user to a seated position, which imposes a greater load on the lumbar spinal discs. Simply sitting with the back maintaining its neutral curvatures increases lumbar disc pressure by about 40 percent, according to a 1984 study by Chaffin and Anderson. This stress on the back becomes much greater when resistance is imposed. Also, one is unable to absorb any shock loading by flexing the knees, hips or ankles, as in the case when standing.
With the vast amounts of stress capable of being exerted by a machine, an examination of the training safety of machines is in order. Many machines force the user to initiate the movement from the biomechanically least efficient and potentially most dangerous position for the joint involved in the movement. Thus, it is safe to say that any stress imposed on the body when using a seated machine will amplify the possible danger to joints and to the spinal cord.
The benefits of free weights to either the female, average gym attendee or elite athlete are tremendous. Foremost among the attributes developed are the muscle's ability to sense their position in relation to each other (proprioception). When a load is imposed on the trainee through a barbell or dumbbell, there is no physical guide to the initiation or termination of the movement, so the trainee must rely on proprioception. Along with this development comes the introduction of the stabilizer muscles, which exert force to maintain balance under load.
The last issue to address is the specific regimen to which to adhere. The number of free weight training options available can make things confusing to the novice trainee.
First, lift heavy. Insignificant loads, less than 40 percent of a one-rep max, will impose no positive training effect. Forget about utilizing the five-pound weights for marathon arm sessions. Forget popular conceptions concerning a female's supposed ability to develop muscle mass at a spectacular rate, resulting in a bulky figure. Significant muscle mass takes years to develop, and to think otherwise insults any trainee with a modicum of experience. No one gets muscular overnight.
Free weights are a viable and excellent option for the female trainee, in sharp contrast to the negligible benefits offered by machine training.
For questions about fitness and healthy living, email at Matt6687@gmail.com.
Be the first to comment on this story