- Joined
- Feb 6, 2012
- Messages
- 2,517
- Reaction score
- 686
The fact that the rapid gains normally last a few months at most and people will substitue with cardio instead is laughable to me.
Damn you are daft. Obvously genetic dispositions are at play as with most all diseases, but that doesn't mean that the preventive measures aren't the same. This is from the article you posted:http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/Condi...ase-Stroke_UCM_442849_Article.jsp#mainContent
Your article doesnt amuse me one bit. Family history is huuuugggeee factor in determining if you will get CVD. If you are lifting weights you are being active. If you walk a few minutes a day you are being active. If you are jogging 45 minutes a day while doing a novice LP you will not make the same progress that you would if you werent. Progress on the most important quality to have in common life as per Rips article
Lol you are a physio student rehashing bullshit that your university taught you with their blanket reccomendations for a "higher quality of life"
Stronger is better 10 out of 10 times and i dont need a rocket science degree to figure out this simple concept. It really isnt anything a breaking that rippetoe has pointed this out.
But hey if 45 minutes of cardio is more important to you then go ahead be my guest but dont come on here pretending that you and your university have this all figured out that cardio is more important than being strong. When you are in the nursing home and cant get off the toilet from a lack of strength maybe by then you will
figure out this basic concept. At least you will be able to say to yourself that you accomplished johging 45 minutes a day.
Now we're back to the start of the argument. What's more important is often times up to the individual interpretation, or what demographic context you look at it in. However, it's not debatable which adaptions does what. That's science and physiology.Lol you are a physio student rehashing bullshit that your university taught you with their blanket reccomendations for a "higher quality of life"
Stronger is better 10 out of 10 times and i dont need a rocket science degree to figure out this simple concept. It really isnt anything a breaking that rippetoe has pointed this out.
But hey if 45 minutes of cardio is more important to you then go ahead be my guest but dont come on here pretending that you and your university have this all figured out that cardio is more important than being strong. When you are in the nursing home and cant get off the toilet from a lack of strength maybe by then you will
figure out this basic concept. At least you will be able to say to yourself that you accomplished johging 45 minutes a day.
True. I still believe that anerobic exercise is less important for general health, but definitely important for performance. I think we just got into a debate with single minded attributes, but as I said, I would never have someone do only one thing. Mobility and flexibility exercises are definitely valuable assets too.For general health, why even talk about strength vs. cardio? Wouldn't most just recommend GPP. Mix in some training with resistance, aerobic, anaerobic, flexibility, etc.
No. In this case, there are probably a lot of us.well arent you a special snowflake^
People that die of heart disease well there is normally a predisposed genetic condition via family history that effects a large amount of people and all the cardio in the world will not fix it.
I haven't read a single post.