|
Related Topics:
| The Book of Muscle - Anyone have this book? From Men's Health. I have used the book for ref: for years and I think (there fore I am) going to just work through chapters 14, 15 & 16 The next few months. It looks like it will be a real good workout starting as a
Principles of Weightlifting/Bodybuilding Book? - Hi, I've been working out for a while, and am now in the behind adding mass. Is there a book that goes into the of how mass is added, how muscle groups are worked, the role of eating, etc...? I'd like..
TIBETAN HEALING BOOK Energy of the Himalaya - TIBETAN HEALING BOOK Energy of the Himalaya; help yourself & help others. Healing stick, singing bowls, healing specific deseases. New liquid edition (for This book will be of interest to all natural healers and to other people..
Lyle's books - anyone read? - Lyle is a pretty prolific writer, and I'm in reading one of his books. I'm not sure which one to start with though, he seems to have several that touch on my goals of overall fat loss and muscle As a female who has been pretty..
Gun books recommendations - David Cohen this one sometime back: "The Gun Digest Book Of Combat 5th After reading several others that I ordered, this one is the current read. Best book yet, thanks! :-) Extremely for a neophyte, and..
|
|
|
Next: Weight Training Video: For Keith Hobman: Tommy Kono's new book
|
| Author |
Message |
External
Since: Jul 29, 2005
Posts: 16
|
(Msg. 16) Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2005 9:12 pm
Post subject: Re: heavyhands vs. Facts and Fallacies of Fitness book? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: misc>fitness>weights (more info?)
|
|
|
inclines are only available on a treadmill -- in the real world its
often flat. there are good reasons not to run, as i described in my
own situation in a recent post. so then, how to increasing the
intensity of walking? I think:
1. heavyhands. We've got a certain amount of time available for our
walks, which hasn't decreased due to HH; now my arms are constantly
exercising too, instead of just swinging at my sides. Surely that's a
good thing?! Did you read the Clarence Bass page? He writes,
"Walking without hand weights on a flat treadmill my heart rate was 86
beats per minute, and increased only three beats, to 89, pumping one
pounders to waist level. As Dr. Schwartz predicted, however, my heart
rate increased substantially, to 104 and 117, when I pumped to shoulder
and head level, respectively. I tried the same routine with the
treadmill incline increased to 5%, with similar results. Walking on a
5% grade without weights produced a heart rate of 100, while pumping
one pounders to shoulder level upped my heart rate to 115. Finally, I
lowered the treadmill to 2.5% and pumped all the way overhead.
Significantly, this produced the highest ticker reading, 138 beats per
minute. Not very scientific I suppose, but enough to convince me that
Dr. Schwartz is correct about verticality. Pump height markedly
increases intensity, even with dinky 1-pound hand weights"
It just seems obvious to me that repeatedly moving DBs while you walk
has got to be better than not doing so. Above you see the heartrate
evidence, for cardio-vascular development -- but surely it'd have to be
good for my upper-body strength-endurance too, how could it not? I'm
using 3kg weights, and OK that's not very much at all ... but on the
other hand, when hammering nails or punching the bag you don't hold
heavier than that. So for me personally, i feel strength-endurance
even in that low weight-range is valuable to me.
I don't see that I'm dramatically increasing chance of injury to my
joints (as you agree elsewhere). People who do labouring jobs manage
to work a lot harder than I am on my walks. So far I've only had vague
& unsubstantiated claims that heavyhands (while walking) is dangeous,
so I'm not really worried.
2. The only other option i can see for increasing intensity on a walk
is doing 'roadwork', eg. stopping and doing 10 pushups every block.
This idea is OK, though perhaps a bit annoying as its a bit of an
interruption. ah ... but interspersing a short sprint could be doable
-- good for CV-fitness & weightloss, though it doesn't address the wish
for an upper-body workout ... the walking phase + HH will do that. but
hopefully won't start my wife getting shin-splints again, we'll see.
Anyway thanks everyone for contributing, though its been a bit of a
ramble. Any other comments on the matter appreciated
~Charlie |
|
| Back to top |
|
 | |
External
Since: Feb 07, 2005
Posts: 610
|
(Msg. 17) Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2005 11:38 pm
Post subject: Re: heavyhands vs. Facts and Fallacies of Fitness book? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
yoko.guruma RemoveThis @gmail.com wrote:
> In the files section of the Supertraining groups there are some pages
> scanned from the 'Facts and Fallacies of Fitness' book. In the list of
> myths one of them is, "Use of small hand weights during aerobics
> significantly increases energy expenditure".
>
> According to the Heavyhands book & Clarence Bass
> (www.cbass.com/DESKOF.HTM) there is clear evidence and good
> explanations to the contrary.
>
> Does anyone have this Facts/Fallacies book and/or can explain their
> reasoning?
>
> thanks,
> Charlie
>
Using weights in the hands (or strapped to the wrists) during running
has been shown to cause scapular stress fractures. Do NOT use hand
weights when running, and it's probably a bad idea for most 'aerobics'
type classes, too, with all the arm pumping and swinging that goes on.
However, running is more of a ballistic activity than most of these
classes even approximate.
Ari
--
spammage trappage: replace fishies_ with yahoo
I'm going to die rather sooner than I'd like. I tried to protect my
neighbours from crime, and became the victim of it. Complications in
hospital following this resulted in a serious illness. I now need a bone
marrow transplant. Many people around the world are waiting for a marrow
transplant, too. Please volunteer to be a marrow donor:
http://www.abmdr.org.au/
http://www.marrow.org/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jul 31, 2005
Posts: 2
|
(Msg. 18) Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2005 12:15 am
Post subject: Re: heavyhands vs. Facts and Fallacies of Fitness book? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 23:26:06 -0400, The Bill Rodgers <TBR.RemoveThis@comcast.net>
wrote:
>On 30 Jul 2005 20:19:05 -0700, yoko.guruma.RemoveThis@gmail.com wrote:
>
>>by saying 'moving weights' I'm just refering to the practice of
>>heavyhands exercise, specifically the walking variations are my
>>interest. This means holding DB's in your hands while you
>>pump/curl/lift/press/etc through large ROM, using short or long levers.
>> You vary tempo, levers & ROM according to how you you feel (current
>>energy, soreness, heartrate etc).
>>
>>If you have a problem with adding weight to exercise, i think you're in
>>the wrong newsgroup 
>
>I train with weights, and I run 9 miles a day, but I'm not stupid
>enough to do both at once. I also eat, and poop, but the same rule
>applys. Think about it...
>
>TBR
>"As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and
>more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day
>the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the
>White House will be adorned by a downright moron."
>H.L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
>"Anyone with degrees from Yale and Harvard is presumed to be intelligent,
>but George W. Bush has managed to overcome that presumption."
I wonder about carrying a backpack now. Perhaps I should stop doing
it. Or running with a fanny pack that has my camera and water. ; )
My guess is that in moderation at non-running speeds, weights on the
limbs *may* enhance strength, as long as it doesn't hurt much
afterwards.
At my job, I have to carry heavy pails distances, usually two at a
time. I believe this is a recommended long-standing exercise known as
the Farmer's Walk. I highly recommend it also, using dumbbells
instead.
Try these exercises you ask about and see if it hurts badly
afterwards, more than typical DOMS. If so, quit. If not, and you like
it, go for it. Trust your own body's responses.
Joe C. >> Stay informed about: heavyhands vs. Facts and Fallacies of Fitness book? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jul 29, 2005
Posts: 16
|
(Msg. 19) Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2005 12:26 am
Post subject: Re: heavyhands vs. Facts and Fallacies of Fitness book? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
> If you have a gym available, this should be a non-issue --
> get to your gym.
can't walk my dog in the gym; anyway i'd rather find outdoor solutions
than be stuck indoors
> That's still not very effective exercise.
you think increasing heart rate from 86bpm to 117bpm _isn't_ effective
exercise - how do you figure that??
>>It just seems obvious to me that repeatedly moving DBs
>> while you walk has got to be better than not doing so.
>
> Depends. "Better" for what ?
1. um, better for everything, for overall fitness? We're talking about
exercising all of the body as opposed to just the lower-half, do you
honestly think there's no point to that? this is not a trivial feat to
accomplish, and if you tried it you'd find its not easy, its another
way to stress your muscles.
2. surely the example of raising one's BPM by 30 would result in
strengthening of the heart?
> It will make you better at walking with handweights. But
> a number of strength-endurance adaptions are highly
> specific. Specific enough for example that a highly
> competitive cyclist can switch to running, and yet they
> are initially not very fast when they switch -- they climb
> along a similar curve to an untrained beginner.
c'mon! really? even with their strong cardio fitness, there's not a
crossover benefit to another cardio event? Their strong, developed leg
muscles wouldn't help them be a better runner than an untrained
beginner -- I'm sorry but this is hard to believe.
>> 2. The only other option i can see for increasing
>> intensity on a walk is doing 'roadwork', eg. stopping and
>> doing 10 pushups every block. This idea is OK, though
>> perhaps a bit annoying as its a bit of an interruption.
>> ah ... but interspersing a short sprint could be doable
> Wouldn't help a whole lot. Why not just jog ?
i suppose that could be an option, though in this case weird as its a
bit antisocial to be zooming to and fro while wifey walks along. and it
doesnt't exercise the upper-body. i want to maximize the returns of my
exercise-time, so i'd prefer to work the whole body at once.
look, combat-sports are my thing. I'm normally a Judo player, but when
I'm boxing, I'm repeatedly throwing punches, sometimes with gloves on
(ie.weight). When I'm HH walking, I'm repeatedly swinging & pressing
out DBs. Seems like a good fit to me.
> I don't understand what sort of "upper body workout"
> you're after. If you're hoping to gain "general upper body
> endurance", there's not really such a thing. You have some
> very general aerobic adaptions (where training your legs
> is as good as training your arms) and you have some that
> are highly specific.
OK, I admit I'm pretty vague as to the specific gains I'm looking for.
I just find myself in a situation where I'm walking a lot, so I'm
trying to make the best of it. When you start HH'ing its difficult to
keep up good speed & ROM. But now I can see progress, I'm getting
better at these things -- so my muscles must be adapting to the
demands, in some strange way I'm getting stronger.
1. upper-body strength-endurance: two examples that are of a similar
nature to this activity to benefit (unlike rowing/kayaking, etc) would
be boxing and carpentry.
2. cardio-vascular training: Apparently this activity can raise you
heartrate by 30 beats above normal walking HR. I don't have a
heart-rate monitor to test my own response to it -- maybe some of you
out there could run some trials and let us know? Anyway, are you
actually telling me that such an extra load wouldn't have a positive
effect on your heart?
cheers,
Charlie >> Stay informed about: heavyhands vs. Facts and Fallacies of Fitness book? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jul 29, 2005
Posts: 16
|
(Msg. 20) Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2005 3:55 am
Post subject: Re: heavyhands vs. Facts and Fallacies of Fitness book? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
> If you're going to walk at the same pace as a slow-walking
> wife, you're not going to get a very good workout.
you cheeky bastard! she walks as quickly as she can push the pram, its
quite brisk. and thanks for clueing in -- the whole point of this
thread has become 'how to get a good workout while walking'
> Going for a stroll around the block with your wife, 2 kids > and a dog is NOT a workout. Not even if you carry dumbells
> in both hands.
anything is better than nothing -- its certainly better than having
another cup of tea & watching cartoons. I'm not up for arguing any
more for the benefits of HH, if you're curious about its worth I'd
suggest you have a read of Leonard Schwartz' books (it has heaps of
details of his laboratory experiments on the practice, which i can tell
you'd get more out of than i have) or actually try it for yourself. Go
out early one morning with some DB's, and try for yourself to see how
easy or hard it is to match your arm/leg stride with a large ROM.
to me, you haven't presented overwhelmingly persuasive arguments
against its value, but thanks for trying. I did want any such opinions
Cheers,
Charlie >> Stay informed about: heavyhands vs. Facts and Fallacies of Fitness book? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jan 26, 2005
Posts: 440
|
(Msg. 21) Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2005 4:36 am
Post subject: Re: heavyhands vs. Facts and Fallacies of Fitness book? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On 2005-08-01, yoko.guruma DeleteThis @gmail.com <yoko.guruma DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> walking is far more convenient with my wife pushing a pram filled with
> two kids, and me with a dog on a leash connected to my belt. Plus,
If you're going to walk at the same pace as a slow-walking wife, you're
not going to get a very good workout. I doubt that your dog would have
much trouble keeping up with you, unless it's a very old or sick dog.
> everytime my wife runs she develops shin-splints; walking is more
> injury-free & therefore sustainable.
Running can also be injury-free and sustainable. Injury can be avoided,
it's a matter of acquiring appropriate footwear, and using a sensible
training program. Beginners are vulnerable to injury at least partly
because they have no idea how to train, and they are often not properly
equipped.
> The problem is how to raise the intensity of walking so that it becomes
> more valuable for exercise.
Going for a stroll around the block with your wife, 2 kids and a dog is NOT
a workout. Not even if you carry dumbells in both hands.
Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ >> Stay informed about: heavyhands vs. Facts and Fallacies of Fitness book? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jan 26, 2005
Posts: 440
|
(Msg. 22) Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2005 4:45 am
Post subject: Re: heavyhands vs. Facts and Fallacies of Fitness book? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On 2005-08-01, yoko.guruma RemoveThis @gmail.com <yoko.guruma RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> inclines are only available on a treadmill -- in the real world its
> often flat.
If you have a gym available, this should be a non-issue -- get to your
gym.
> "Walking without hand weights on a flat treadmill my heart rate was 86
> beats per minute, and increased only three beats, to 89, pumping one
> pounders to waist level. As Dr. Schwartz predicted, however, my heart
> rate increased substantially, to 104 and 117, when I pumped to shoulder
That's still not very effective exercise.
> and head level, respectively. I tried the same routine with the
> treadmill incline increased to 5%, with similar results. Walking on a
> 5% grade without weights produced a heart rate of 100, while pumping
> one pounders to shoulder level upped my heart rate to 115. Finally, I
That doesn't imply that the VO2 is the same as it was for the hand weights.
[snip]
> It just seems obvious to me that repeatedly moving DBs while you walk
> has got to be better than not doing so.
Depends. "Better" for what ?
> Above you see the heartrate
> evidence, for cardio-vascular development -- but surely it'd have to be
> good for my upper-body strength-endurance too, how could it not? I'm
It will make you better at walking with handweights. But a number of
strength-endurance adaptions are highly specific. Specific enough for
example that a highly competitive cyclist can switch to running, and yet
they are initially not very fast when they switch -- they climb along a
similar curve to an untrained beginner.
> I don't see that I'm dramatically increasing chance of injury to my
> joints (as you agree elsewhere).
I don't really agree or disagree. *Any* source of repetitive stress is an
injury risk, the only question is how great the risk is. I suspect it's
not all that great if you're just walking with them. But I also suspect
that the benefits of the exercise are not that great.
> 2. The only other option i can see for increasing intensity on a walk
> is doing 'roadwork', eg. stopping and doing 10 pushups every block.
> This idea is OK, though perhaps a bit annoying as its a bit of an
> interruption. ah ... but interspersing a short sprint could be doable
Wouldn't help a whole lot. Why not just jog ? If you want to stay in
reasonable proximity to your family, then jog ahead and jog back or
something.
> -- good for CV-fitness & weightloss, though it doesn't address the wish
> for an upper-body workout ...
I don't understand what sort of "upper body workout" you're after. If you're
hoping to gain "general upper body endurance", there's not really such a
thing. You have some very general aerobic adaptions (where training your legs
is as good as training your arms) and you have some that are highly specific.
Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ >> Stay informed about: heavyhands vs. Facts and Fallacies of Fitness book? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jul 29, 2005
Posts: 16
|
(Msg. 23) Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2005 5:49 am
Post subject: Re: heavyhands vs. Facts and Fallacies of Fitness book? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
The Bill Rodgers wrote:
> You are wasting your time talking to this jerk Donovan. He
> doesn't want advice, he just wants to hear opinions that
> match his sad fantasys. He'll reply with why you're wrong,
> and why his fat wife can't run.
we are sitting here giggling at your post, you have made some huge &
incorrect assumptions about us. My beautiful wife is by no means fat
or out-of-shape just because she's had two kids & gets shinsplints.
She swims 100 laps 3x a week at the pool. I'm a competitive Judo
player. We ride our bikes towing a kiddy-trailer several times a week
for fun & for getting the groceries. We are both slender, <70kg and
have always been sporty.
Its a shame we've gotten off on the wrong foot; I'm sorry if I've been
brusque with you in my replies. Feel free to stop reading this thread
if its getting you too worked up. >> Stay informed about: heavyhands vs. Facts and Fallacies of Fitness book? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Aug 02, 2005
Posts: 570
|
(Msg. 24) Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2005 7:01 am
Post subject: Re: heavyhands vs. Facts and Fallacies of Fitness book? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On 31 Jul 2005 17:35:19 -0700, yoko.guruma RemoveThis @gmail.com wrote:
> I'm not convinced that it'll destroy or
>injure joints.
Don't be, but when you're having shoulder replacement surgery,
unexplained back pain, arthritis, operations to repair tears, bone
spurs, and other injurys. you'll regret it. And donb't come crying
here, because you are the typical newbie idiot who waltzes on here
asking for advice, but then when you don't hear what you want to hear,
you stop listening.
Piss off moron.
TBR
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and
more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day
the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the
White House will be adorned by a downright moron."
H.L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
"Anyone with degrees from Yale and Harvard is presumed to be intelligent,
but George W. Bush has managed to overcome that presumption." >> Stay informed about: heavyhands vs. Facts and Fallacies of Fitness book? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Aug 02, 2005
Posts: 570
|
(Msg. 25) Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2005 7:03 am
Post subject: Re: heavyhands vs. Facts and Fallacies of Fitness book? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Mon, 1 Aug 2005 01:36:27 +0000 (UTC), Donovan Rebbechi
<abuse.TakeThisOut@aol.com> wrote:
>Running can also be injury-free and sustainable. Injury can be avoided,
>it's a matter of acquiring appropriate footwear, and using a sensible
>training program. Beginners are vulnerable to injury at least partly
>because they have no idea how to train, and they are often not properly
>equipped.
You are wasting your time talking to this jerk Donovan. He doesn't
want advice, he just wants to hear opinions that match his sad
fantasys. He'll reply with why you're wrong, and why his fat wife
can't run.
TBR
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and
more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day
the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the
White House will be adorned by a downright moron."
H.L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
"Anyone with degrees from Yale and Harvard is presumed to be intelligent,
but George W. Bush has managed to overcome that presumption." >> Stay informed about: heavyhands vs. Facts and Fallacies of Fitness book? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Aug 02, 2005
Posts: 570
|
(Msg. 26) Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2005 7:05 am
Post subject: Re: heavyhands vs. Facts and Fallacies of Fitness book? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On 1 Aug 2005 00:55:29 -0700, yoko.guruma DeleteThis @gmail.com wrote:
>you cheeky bastard! she walks as quickly as she can push the pram, its
>quite brisk. and thanks for clueing in -- the whole point of this
>thread has become 'how to get a good workout while walking'
See Donovan? What'd I tell you? He's another "fat turd" who thinks
going around the block with his overweight wife, will make him an
athelete. He doesn't want advice.
TBR
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and
more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day
the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the
White House will be adorned by a downright moron."
H.L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
"Anyone with degrees from Yale and Harvard is presumed to be intelligent,
but George W. Bush has managed to overcome that presumption." >> Stay informed about: heavyhands vs. Facts and Fallacies of Fitness book? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jan 12, 2005
Posts: 2882
|
(Msg. 27) Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2005 12:35 pm
Post subject: Re: heavyhands vs. Facts and Fallacies of Fitness book? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
<yoko.guruma.DeleteThis@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1122882929.429272.175360@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
> > If you're going to walk at the same pace as a slow-walking
> > wife, you're not going to get a very good workout.
>
> you cheeky bastard! she walks as quickly as she can push the pram, its
> quite brisk. and thanks for clueing in -- the whole point of this
> thread has become 'how to get a good workout while walking'
>
> > Going for a stroll around the block with your wife, 2 kids > and a dog
is NOT a workout. Not even if you carry dumbells
> > in both hands.
>
> anything is better than nothing -- its certainly better than having
> another cup of tea & watching cartoons. I'm not up for arguing any
> more for the benefits of HH, if you're curious about its worth I'd
> suggest you have a read of Leonard Schwartz' books (it has heaps of
> details of his laboratory experiments on the practice, which i can tell
> you'd get more out of than i have) or actually try it for yourself. Go
> out early one morning with some DB's, and try for yourself to see how
> easy or hard it is to match your arm/leg stride with a large ROM.
>
> to me, you haven't presented overwhelmingly persuasive arguments
> against its value, but thanks for trying. I did want any such opinions
>
> Cheers,
> Charlie
Don't worry about these guys - I read Schwartz's book around 15 years ago -
HH was a lot more popular then - I didn't notice every 2nd person getting
injuries - his research was extensive and showed significant benefits in
adding light db while walking. Start off with 1kg and add just 25gms at a
time very gradually and don't go more than 2kgs would be my advice. Wear a
heart rate monitor. As long as you are in your target heart rate you are
doing fine. >> Stay informed about: heavyhands vs. Facts and Fallacies of Fitness book? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jan 09, 2005
Posts: 229
|
(Msg. 28) Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2005 2:58 pm
Post subject: Re: heavyhands vs. Facts and Fallacies of Fitness book? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
yoko.guruma.TakeThisOut@gmail.com wrote:
> walking is far more convenient with my wife pushing a pram filled with
> two kids, and me with a dog on a leash connected to my belt. Plus,
> everytime my wife runs she develops shin-splints; walking is more
> injury-free & therefore sustainable.
>
> The problem is how to raise the intensity of walking so that it
> becomes more valuable for exercise. Heavyhands would seem to be one
> way to do so -- despite your assertions, I'm not convinced that it'll
> destroy or injure joints. Haven't you ever done manual labour? I
> did some bricklaying recently, and spent all day long time lifting &
> heaving stuff ... some people do that for a job all their lives. In
> comparison, a 20-minute heavy-hands walk 3x a week is nothing at all.
You'd probably be better off getting yourself a rucksack and 30kg of bricks,
walking slowly with 5kg extra weight in your hands is going to burn maybe 30
calories an hour more than just walking slowly; off your 20' 3x a week
that'll mean you lose an extra pound of fat every two years, if that's what
you're looking for; if you're looking for improved cardiovascular fitness
it's not going to make any difference. A rucksack full of bricks won't
really help your cardio fitness either, but at least it's safer (when you're
walking) and it'll improve your leg strength.
Peter >> Stay informed about: heavyhands vs. Facts and Fallacies of Fitness book? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jan 26, 2005
Posts: 440
|
(Msg. 29) Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2005 3:05 pm
Post subject: Re: heavyhands vs. Facts and Fallacies of Fitness book? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On 2005-08-01, yoko.guruma.TakeThisOut@gmail.com <yoko.guruma.TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:
> Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
>> If you're going to walk at the same pace as a slow-walking
>> wife, you're not going to get a very good workout.
>
> you cheeky bastard! she walks as quickly as she can push the pram, its
> quite brisk. and thanks for clueing in -- the whole point of this
> thread has become 'how to get a good workout while walking'
Yes, and the best answer presented so far is to use an incline on
the treadmill. But you've ignored that.
I agree with the other guy who suggests that you don't want advice, you've
already made up your mind, and you want us to give it a stamp of approval.
Not gonna happen.
>> Going for a stroll around the block with your wife, 2 kids > and a dog is
>> NOT a workout. Not even if you carry dumbells in both hands.
>
> anything is better than nothing -- its certainly better than having
> another cup of tea & watching cartoons.
For the purpose of improving cardiovascular fitness, as Peter Allen pointed
out, you need to be up around 70% HR max. An easy walk will burn a few
calories but other than that, it doesn't do a whole lot.
> I'm not up for arguing any
> more for the benefits of HH, if you're curious about its worth I'd
> suggest you have a read of Leonard Schwartz' books
Are you really asking for advice, or are you posting to give otehrs advice ?
FYI, I run 80 miles a week, I'm confident that I could hand you your ass on
any test of cardiovascular fitness, and I don't need to walk around with
dumbells to improve my cqrdiovascular fitness.
[snip]
> to me, you haven't presented overwhelmingly persuasive arguments
> against its value, but thanks for trying. I did want any such opinions
The argument is that it is not intense enough to be effective.
Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ >> Stay informed about: heavyhands vs. Facts and Fallacies of Fitness book? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jan 09, 2005
Posts: 229
|
(Msg. 30) Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2005 3:13 pm
Post subject: Re: heavyhands vs. Facts and Fallacies of Fitness book? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
yoko.guruma DeleteThis @gmail.com wrote:
> Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
>> That's still not very effective exercise.
>
> you think increasing heart rate from 86bpm to 117bpm _isn't_ effective
> exercise - how do you figure that??
HR at 86 bpm isn't working at all. 117 bpm is maybe just about noticeable.
So there is going to be some benefit, but it'll be too small to be worth
worrying about. You aren't really doing anything effective until you get up
to about 70% of your maximum heart rate. It's also not really valid to
assume there is a relationship between heart rate and the amount of work
you're doing. There is one if you're doing one particular form of exercise -
if you run, HR 150, a bit later on your HR is 180 then you're probably
running faster and doing more work. But you might well be doing less work
than if you were cycling at HR 180, and if you were lifting heavy weights
your heart rate would probably go well over 150 despite the fact that you
are not actually doing very much total work.
>> It will make you better at walking with handweights. But
>> a number of strength-endurance adaptions are highly
>> specific. Specific enough for example that a highly
>> competitive cyclist can switch to running, and yet they
>> are initially not very fast when they switch -- they climb
>> along a similar curve to an untrained beginner.
>
> c'mon! really? even with their strong cardio fitness, there's not a
> crossover benefit to another cardio event? Their strong, developed
> leg muscles wouldn't help them be a better runner than an untrained
> beginner -- I'm sorry but this is hard to believe.
Leg muscles don't have much to do with it in this case. Well developed
cardio fitness will make them faster than a complete beginner, but an elite
level cyclist who tries running will probably start off only being
competitive in local events - they'll have to develop a lot of
running-specific adaptations to become an elite level runner, and it'll take
a fair while. Same way a complete beginner will start very slow, they
develop the running-specific adaptations and become locally competitive,
then over several years (assuming they train properly) their cardiovascular
fitness improves and they may eventually reach elite level if they had the
right parents.
Peter >> Stay informed about: heavyhands vs. Facts and Fallacies of Fitness book? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|
FAQ
Search
Profile
Private Messages
Log in/Register/Password
