Is physical frailty inevitable as we grow older?

[Guest guest]

On Nov 11, 2011, at 10:44 AM, carruthersjam wrote:

> Members may wish to add their insights:

>

> Is physical frailty inevitable as we grow older?

>

> http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/09/aging-well-through-exercise/

It's almost a DUH!! There is no question that exercise is helpful in maintaining

youthful activity ability with age. I'm now almost 74 (In Feb. of '12) and I

only workout once a week for about a half an hour, doing HIT. I look muscular

and most people think I'm in my 50's. About a score of years ago I was a

personal trainer and trained an 81 year old man, who doubled his 1RM strength in

6 mos. and another at 84, who eliminated his walker and took up walking daily

for recreation.

Bar accident or disease, I fully expect to be able to do the things most 40 year

olds do when I'm 80. That's almost a given, I guess, looking at most of the

people I see in the gym who are 40, and even more so with the average person on

the street.

Exercise _does_ fight feebleness in the aged (and the young).

Fair winds and happy bytes, Dave Flory, Flower Mound, TX

Speak softly and study Aikido, and you won't need to carry a big stick.

[Guest guest]

Hi,

My response is no.

In the case of my uncle; he was 84 when he passed away.  One thing I always

remember about him, was that even though he did no manual labour for I guess at

least 20 years before he died; he was very strong.  Certainly his grip strength

was greater than mine.  I have often wondered why this was so.  We often hear

the adage " use it or lose it. "   He retained his muscle right throughout his

life.  From a young age he worked physically hard in the family's fruit and

vegetable business; unloading and loading trucks.My father, now at that same age

is a different case altogether.  He has suffered sarcopenia. I suspect he did

not have as much time under a 110 pound sack of potatoes.  

Regards

Sharah

Sydney Australia

________________________________

From: carruthersjam <Carruthersjam@...>

Supertraining

Sent: Saturday, 12 November 2011 3:44 AM

Subject: Is physical frailty inevitable as we grow older?

 

Members may wish to add their insights:

Is physical frailty inevitable as we grow older?

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/09/aging-well-through-exercise/

That question preoccupies scientists and the middle-aged, particularly when they

become the same people. Until recently, the evidence was disheartening. A large

number of studies in the past few years showed that after age 40, people

typically lose 8 percent or more of their muscle mass each decade, a process

that accelerates significantly after age 70. Less muscle mass generally means

less strength, mobility and among the elderly, independence. It also has been

linked with premature mortality.

But a growing body of newer science suggests that such decline may not be

inexorable. Exercise, the thinking goes, and you might be able to rewrite the

future for your muscles.

Consider the results of a stirring study published last month in the journal The

Physician and Sportsmedicine. For it, researchers at the University of

Pittsburgh recruited 40 competitive runners, cyclists and swimmers. They ranged

in age from 40 to 81, with five men and five women representing each of four age

groups: 40 to 49, 50 to 59, 60 to 69, and 70-plus. All were enviably fit,

training four or five times a week and competing frequently. Several had won

their age groups in recent races.

They completed questionnaires detailing their health and weekly physical

activities. Then the researchers measured their muscle mass, leg strength and

body composition, determining how much of their body and, more specifically,

their muscle tissue was composed of fat. Other studies have found that as people

age, they not only lose muscle, but the tissue that remains can become

infiltrated with fat, degrading its quality and reducing its strength.

There was little evidence of deterioration in the older athletes' musculature,

however. The athletes in their 70s and 80s had almost as much thigh muscle mass

as the athletes in their 40s, with minor if any fat infiltration. The athletes

also remained strong. There was, as scientists noted, a drop-off in leg muscle

strength around age 60 in both men and women. They weren't as strong as the

50-year-olds, but the differential was not huge, and little additional decline

followed. The 70- and 80-year-old athletes were about as strong as those in

their 60s.

" We think these are very encouraging results, " said Dr. Vonda , an

orthopedic surgeon and founder of the Performance and Research Initiative for

Masters Athletes at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, who oversaw the

study. " They suggest strongly that people don't have to lose muscle mass and

function as they grow older. The changes that we've assumed were due to aging

and therefore were unstoppable seem actually to be caused by inactivity. And

that can be changed. "

Other recent studies have produced similar findings. Last year, researchers at

the Canadian Centre for Activity and Aging, for instance, examined muscle tissue

from older competitive runners, checking for the density of their motor units, a

measure of muscle health. A motor unit is, essentially, the control mechanism of

a functioning muscle, composed of a neuron and the particular muscle fibers that

that neuron activates. The more motor units in a muscle, the stronger it

generally is.

In multiple earlier studies, people over 50 have been found to possess far fewer

muscle motor units than young adults. But that wasn't true for the sexagenarian

runners, whose leg muscles teemed with almost as many motor units as a separate

group of active 25-year-olds. Running, the scientists wrote, seemed able to

" mitigate the loss of motor units with aging well into the seventh decade of

life. "

Of course, the volunteers in both Dr. 's and the Canadian study were, for

the most part, lifelong athletes. Whether similar benefits are attainable by

people who take up exercise when they are middle-aged or older " isn't yet

clear, " Dr. says, " although there's no reason to think that you wouldn't

get similar results no matter when you start. "

In an encouraging animal study from last year, elderly rats that had been

sedentary throughout their adult lives were put on a running program. After 13

weeks, their leg muscle tissues had filled with new satellite cells, a

specialized type of stem cell that is known to build and repair muscle.

Comparable experiments in older people have yet to be done, though.

Other questions about the impacts of exercise on aging muscle also remain

unanswered. " We don't know what kinds of exercise are best, " Dr. says

and, in particular, whether endurance exercise is necessary for muscle sparing

or whether weight training might be as good or better. Scientists also haven't

determined just how much activity is required to maintain muscle mass, or how

intense it needs to be.

" What we can say with certainty is that any activity is better than none, " Dr.

says, " and more is probably better than less. But the bigger message is

that it looks as if how we age can be under our control. Through exercise, you

can preserve muscle mass and strength and avoid the decline from vitality to

frailty. "

================

Carruthers

Wakefield, UK

[Guest guest]

Sigh. Runners.

These folks went about it the hard way with runners, they might have just looked

at older PL and OL who are quite handy still at sport and also clearly not

" frail " . One of my favorite " geezer " lifters is a guy who looks like Santa Claus

and is from Norway - I still suspect this guy loads up the sleigh and hands out

toys, he's so darned fit... he'd have to add on the gut to look the part in

popular depictions though...

My hope for a healthy and not frail future is to ignore the BMI nonsense and

keep lifting.

One reason for hope for the lifter is that they had to add age groups due to

demand at the high end of the age brackets...and as I've said before, if Grandma

wants to deadlift, hand her the chalk and teach her good form. (And for

safety's sake, teach Grandpa too.... )

Shorter's physique in the past few years was clearly not the result of

just running.... how obvious is it that the answer to not being frail is to keep

moving, but also to use weights?

The authors might have just followed around the camera crew for the show " Are

You Fitter than a Senior " (aired this year on a cable network and probably

trademarked or other copyright). They took out of shape UK young adults and

matched them up against folks in retirement communities quite determined to stay

fit by exercise - and it was clear there are a lot of folks in decent shape in

the geezer ranks...and quite out of shape younger folk. Some of the folks they

had in that show were quite impressive in physique and fitness level...!

With hope for a strong and healthy future for me and the rest of our vaunted

List Members...

The Phantom

aka Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter

Denver, Colorado, USA

Is physical frailty inevitable as we grow older?

Members may wish to add their insights:

Is physical frailty inevitable as we grow older?

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/09/aging-well-through-exercise/

That question preoccupies scientists and the middle-aged, particularly when they

become the same people. Until recently, the evidence was disheartening. A large

number of studies in the past few years showed that after age 40, people

typically lose 8 percent or more of their muscle mass each decade, a process

that accelerates significantly after age 70. Less muscle mass generally means

less strength, mobility and among the elderly, independence. It also has been

linked with premature mortality.

But a growing body of newer science suggests that such decline may not be

inexorable. Exercise, the thinking goes, and you might be able to rewrite the

future for your muscles.

Consider the results of a stirring study published last month in the journal The

Physician and Sportsmedicine. For it, researchers at the University of

Pittsburgh recruited 40 competitive runners, cyclists and swimmers. They ranged

in age from 40 to 81, with five men and five women representing each of four age

groups: 40 to 49, 50 to 59, 60 to 69, and 70-plus. All were enviably fit,

training four or five times a week and competing frequently. Several had won

their age groups in recent races.

They completed questionnaires detailing their health and weekly physical

activities. Then the researchers measured their muscle mass, leg strength and

body composition, determining how much of their body and, more specifically,

their muscle tissue was composed of fat. Other studies have found that as people

age, they not only lose muscle, but the tissue that remains can become

infiltrated with fat, degrading its quality and reducing its strength.

There was little evidence of deterioration in the older athletes' musculature,

however. The athletes in their 70s and 80s had almost as much thigh muscle mass

as the athletes in their 40s, with minor if any fat infiltration. The athletes

also remained strong. There was, as scientists noted, a drop-off in leg muscle

strength around age 60 in both men and women. They weren't as strong as the

50-year-olds, but the differential was not huge, and little additional decline

followed. The 70- and 80-year-old athletes were about as strong as those in

their 60s.

" We think these are very encouraging results, " said Dr. Vonda , an

orthopedic surgeon and founder of the Performance and Research Initiative for

Masters Athletes at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, who oversaw the

study. " They suggest strongly that people don't have to lose muscle mass and

function as they grow older. The changes that we've assumed were due to aging

and therefore were unstoppable seem actually to be caused by inactivity. And

that can be changed. "

Other recent studies have produced similar findings. Last year, researchers at

the Canadian Centre for Activity and Aging, for instance, examined muscle tissue

from older competitive runners, checking for the density of their motor units, a

measure of muscle health. A motor unit is, essentially, the control mechanism of

a functioning muscle, composed of a neuron and the particular muscle fibers that

that neuron activates. The more motor units in a muscle, the stronger it

generally is.

In multiple earlier studies, people over 50 have been found to possess far fewer

muscle motor units than young adults. But that wasn't true for the sexagenarian

runners, whose leg muscles teemed with almost as many motor units as a separate

group of active 25-year-olds. Running, the scientists wrote, seemed able to

" mitigate the loss of motor units with aging well into the seventh decade of

life. "

Of course, the volunteers in both Dr. 's and the Canadian study were, for

the most part, lifelong athletes. Whether similar benefits are attainable by

people who take up exercise when they are middle-aged or older " isn't yet

clear, " Dr. says, " although there's no reason to think that you wouldn't

get similar results no matter when you start. "

In an encouraging animal study from last year, elderly rats that had been

sedentary throughout their adult lives were put on a running program. After 13

weeks, their leg muscle tissues had filled with new satellite cells, a

specialized type of stem cell that is known to build and repair muscle.

Comparable experiments in older people have yet to be done, though.

Other questions about the impacts of exercise on aging muscle also remain

unanswered. " We don't know what kinds of exercise are best, " Dr. says

and, in particular, whether endurance exercise is necessary for muscle sparing

or whether weight training might be as good or better. Scientists also haven't

determined just how much activity is required to maintain muscle mass, or how

intense it needs to be.

" What we can say with certainty is that any activity is better than none, " Dr.

says, " and more is probably better than less. But the bigger message is

that it looks as if how we age can be under our control. Through exercise, you

can preserve muscle mass and strength and avoid the decline from vitality to

frailty. "

================

Carruthers

Wakefield, UK

[Guest guest]

Wow you were in a very intense sport. Rowing is very intense. I've tried

rowing on a rowing machine at the gym and boy oh boy my whole body was sore

after an hour's worth of training. And that's with a trainer at the gym helping

me. I don't get that sore after lifting weights.

I think people at any age can do some weight training. Weight training doesn't

have to mean heavy powerlifting or weightlifting. Weight training just means

some kind of resistance training. I have heard that in unfit persons weight

training can cause blood pressure to rise so it's best to start with cardio and

then work up to weight training. Would you agree with this doctor?

Edwin Freeman, Jr.

San Francisco, USA

Re: Is physical frailty inevitable as we grow older?

Sigh. Runners.

These folks went about it the hard way with runners, they might have just looked

at older PL and OL who are quite handy still at sport and also clearly not

" frail " . One of my favorite " geezer " lifters is a guy who looks like Santa Claus

and is from Norway - I still suspect this guy loads up the sleigh and hands out

toys, he's so darned fit... he'd have to add on the gut to look the part in

popular depictions though...

My hope for a healthy and not frail future is to ignore the BMI nonsense and

keep lifting.

One reason for hope for the lifter is that they had to add age groups due to

demand at the high end of the age brackets...and as I've said before, if Grandma

wants to deadlift, hand her the chalk and teach her good form. (And for

safety's sake, teach Grandpa too.... )

Shorter's physique in the past few years was clearly not the result of

just running.... how obvious is it that the answer to not being frail is to keep

moving, but also to use weights?

The authors might have just followed around the camera crew for the show " Are

You Fitter than a Senior " (aired this year on a cable network and probably

trademarked or other copyright). They took out of shape UK young adults and

matched them up against folks in retirement communities quite determined to stay

fit by exercise - and it was clear there are a lot of folks in decent shape in

the geezer ranks...and quite out of shape younger folk. Some of the folks they

had in that show were quite impressive in physique and fitness level...!

With hope for a strong and healthy future for me and the rest of our vaunted

List Members...

The Phantom

aka Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter

Denver, Colorado, USA

Is physical frailty inevitable as we grow older?

Members may wish to add their insights:

Is physical frailty inevitable as we grow older?

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/09/aging-well-through-exercise/

That question preoccupies scientists and the middle-aged, particularly when they

become the same people. Until recently, the evidence was disheartening. A large

number of studies in the past few years showed that after age 40, people

typically lose 8 percent or more of their muscle mass each decade, a process

that accelerates significantly after age 70. Less muscle mass generally means

less strength, mobility and among the elderly, independence. It also has been

linked with premature mortality.

But a growing body of newer science suggests that such decline may not be

inexorable. Exercise, the thinking goes, and you might be able to rewrite the

future for your muscles.

Consider the results of a stirring study published last month in the journal The

Physician and Sportsmedicine. For it, researchers at the University of

Pittsburgh recruited 40 competitive runners, cyclists and swimmers. They ranged

in age from 40 to 81, with five men and five women representing each of four age

groups: 40 to 49, 50 to 59, 60 to 69, and 70-plus. All were enviably fit,

training four or five times a week and competing frequently. Several had won

their age groups in recent races.

They completed questionnaires detailing their health and weekly physical

activities. Then the researchers measured their muscle mass, leg strength and

body composition, determining how much of their body and, more specifically,

their muscle tissue was composed of fat. Other studies have found that as people

age, they not only lose muscle, but the tissue that remains can become

infiltrated with fat, degrading its quality and reducing its strength.

There was little evidence of deterioration in the older athletes' musculature,

however. The athletes in their 70s and 80s had almost as much thigh muscle mass

as the athletes in their 40s, with minor if any fat infiltration. The athletes

also remained strong. There was, as scientists noted, a drop-off in leg muscle

strength around age 60 in both men and women. They weren't as strong as the

50-year-olds, but the differential was not huge, and little additional decline

followed. The 70- and 80-year-old athletes were about as strong as those in

their 60s.

" We think these are very encouraging results, " said Dr. Vonda , an

orthopedic surgeon and founder of the Performance and Research Initiative for

Masters Athletes at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, who oversaw the

study. " They suggest strongly that people don't have to lose muscle mass and

function as they grow older. The changes that we've assumed were due to aging

and therefore were unstoppable seem actually to be caused by inactivity. And

that can be changed. "

Other recent studies have produced similar findings. Last year, researchers at

the Canadian Centre for Activity and Aging, for instance, examined muscle tissue

from older competitive runners, checking for the density of their motor units, a

measure of muscle health. A motor unit is, essentially, the control mechanism of

a functioning muscle, composed of a neuron and the particular muscle fibers that

that neuron activates. The more motor units in a muscle, the stronger it

generally is.

In multiple earlier studies, people over 50 have been found to possess far fewer

muscle motor units than young adults. But that wasn't true for the sexagenarian

runners, whose leg muscles teemed with almost as many motor units as a separate

group of active 25-year-olds. Running, the scientists wrote, seemed able to

" mitigate the loss of motor units with aging well into the seventh decade of

life. "

Of course, the volunteers in both Dr. 's and the Canadian study were, for

the most part, lifelong athletes. Whether similar benefits are attainable by

people who take up exercise when they are middle-aged or older " isn't yet

clear, " Dr. says, " although there's no reason to think that you wouldn't

get similar results no matter when you start. "

In an encouraging animal study from last year, elderly rats that had been

sedentary throughout their adult lives were put on a running program. After 13

weeks, their leg muscle tissues had filled with new satellite cells, a

specialized type of stem cell that is known to build and repair muscle.

Comparable experiments in older people have yet to be done, though.

Other questions about the impacts of exercise on aging muscle also remain

unanswered. " We don't know what kinds of exercise are best, " Dr. says

and, in particular, whether endurance exercise is necessary for muscle sparing

or whether weight training might be as good or better. Scientists also haven't

determined just how much activity is required to maintain muscle mass, or how

intense it needs to be.

" What we can say with certainty is that any activity is better than none, " Dr.

says, " and more is probably better than less. But the bigger message is

that it looks as if how we age can be under our control. Through exercise, you

can preserve muscle mass and strength and avoid the decline from vitality to

frailty. "

================

Carruthers

Wakefield, UK

[Guest guest]

Wow you were in a very intense sport. Rowing is very intense. I've tried

rowing on a rowing machine at the gym and boy oh boy my whole body was sore

after an hour's worth of training. And that's with a trainer at the gym helping

me. I don't get that sore after lifting weights.

I think people at any age can do some weight training. Weight training doesn't

have to mean heavy powerlifting or weightlifting. Weight training just means

some kind of resistance training. I have heard that in unfit persons weight

training can cause blood pressure to rise so it's best to start with cardio and

then work up to weight training. Would you agree with this doctor?

Edwin Freeman, Jr.

San Francisco, USA

Re: Is physical frailty inevitable as we grow older?

Sigh. Runners.

These folks went about it the hard way with runners, they might have just looked

at older PL and OL who are quite handy still at sport and also clearly not

" frail " . One of my favorite " geezer " lifters is a guy who looks like Santa Claus

and is from Norway - I still suspect this guy loads up the sleigh and hands out

toys, he's so darned fit... he'd have to add on the gut to look the part in

popular depictions though...

My hope for a healthy and not frail future is to ignore the BMI nonsense and

keep lifting.

One reason for hope for the lifter is that they had to add age groups due to

demand at the high end of the age brackets...and as I've said before, if Grandma

wants to deadlift, hand her the chalk and teach her good form. (And for

safety's sake, teach Grandpa too.... )

Shorter's physique in the past few years was clearly not the result of

just running.... how obvious is it that the answer to not being frail is to keep

moving, but also to use weights?

The authors might have just followed around the camera crew for the show " Are

You Fitter than a Senior " (aired this year on a cable network and probably

trademarked or other copyright). They took out of shape UK young adults and

matched them up against folks in retirement communities quite determined to stay

fit by exercise - and it was clear there are a lot of folks in decent shape in

the geezer ranks...and quite out of shape younger folk. Some of the folks they

had in that show were quite impressive in physique and fitness level...!

With hope for a strong and healthy future for me and the rest of our vaunted

List Members...

The Phantom

aka Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter

Denver, Colorado, USA

Is physical frailty inevitable as we grow older?

Members may wish to add their insights:

Is physical frailty inevitable as we grow older?

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/09/aging-well-through-exercise/

That question preoccupies scientists and the middle-aged, particularly when they

become the same people. Until recently, the evidence was disheartening. A large

number of studies in the past few years showed that after age 40, people

typically lose 8 percent or more of their muscle mass each decade, a process

that accelerates significantly after age 70. Less muscle mass generally means

less strength, mobility and among the elderly, independence. It also has been

linked with premature mortality.

But a growing body of newer science suggests that such decline may not be

inexorable. Exercise, the thinking goes, and you might be able to rewrite the

future for your muscles.

Consider the results of a stirring study published last month in the journal The

Physician and Sportsmedicine. For it, researchers at the University of

Pittsburgh recruited 40 competitive runners, cyclists and swimmers. They ranged

in age from 40 to 81, with five men and five women representing each of four age

groups: 40 to 49, 50 to 59, 60 to 69, and 70-plus. All were enviably fit,

training four or five times a week and competing frequently. Several had won

their age groups in recent races.

They completed questionnaires detailing their health and weekly physical

activities. Then the researchers measured their muscle mass, leg strength and

body composition, determining how much of their body and, more specifically,

their muscle tissue was composed of fat. Other studies have found that as people

age, they not only lose muscle, but the tissue that remains can become

infiltrated with fat, degrading its quality and reducing its strength.

There was little evidence of deterioration in the older athletes' musculature,

however. The athletes in their 70s and 80s had almost as much thigh muscle mass

as the athletes in their 40s, with minor if any fat infiltration. The athletes

also remained strong. There was, as scientists noted, a drop-off in leg muscle

strength around age 60 in both men and women. They weren't as strong as the

50-year-olds, but the differential was not huge, and little additional decline

followed. The 70- and 80-year-old athletes were about as strong as those in

their 60s.

" We think these are very encouraging results, " said Dr. Vonda , an

orthopedic surgeon and founder of the Performance and Research Initiative for

Masters Athletes at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, who oversaw the

study. " They suggest strongly that people don't have to lose muscle mass and

function as they grow older. The changes that we've assumed were due to aging

and therefore were unstoppable seem actually to be caused by inactivity. And

that can be changed. "

Other recent studies have produced similar findings. Last year, researchers at

the Canadian Centre for Activity and Aging, for instance, examined muscle tissue

from older competitive runners, checking for the density of their motor units, a

measure of muscle health. A motor unit is, essentially, the control mechanism of

a functioning muscle, composed of a neuron and the particular muscle fibers that

that neuron activates. The more motor units in a muscle, the stronger it

generally is.

In multiple earlier studies, people over 50 have been found to possess far fewer

muscle motor units than young adults. But that wasn't true for the sexagenarian

runners, whose leg muscles teemed with almost as many motor units as a separate

group of active 25-year-olds. Running, the scientists wrote, seemed able to

" mitigate the loss of motor units with aging well into the seventh decade of

life. "

Of course, the volunteers in both Dr. 's and the Canadian study were, for

the most part, lifelong athletes. Whether similar benefits are attainable by

people who take up exercise when they are middle-aged or older " isn't yet

clear, " Dr. says, " although there's no reason to think that you wouldn't

get similar results no matter when you start. "

In an encouraging animal study from last year, elderly rats that had been

sedentary throughout their adult lives were put on a running program. After 13

weeks, their leg muscle tissues had filled with new satellite cells, a

specialized type of stem cell that is known to build and repair muscle.

Comparable experiments in older people have yet to be done, though.

Other questions about the impacts of exercise on aging muscle also remain

unanswered. " We don't know what kinds of exercise are best, " Dr. says

and, in particular, whether endurance exercise is necessary for muscle sparing

or whether weight training might be as good or better. Scientists also haven't

determined just how much activity is required to maintain muscle mass, or how

intense it needs to be.

" What we can say with certainty is that any activity is better than none, " Dr.

says, " and more is probably better than less. But the bigger message is

that it looks as if how we age can be under our control. Through exercise, you

can preserve muscle mass and strength and avoid the decline from vitality to

frailty. "

================

Carruthers

Wakefield, UK

[Guest guest]

How does one train to reduce cartilage deterioration? You mentioned " well

selected cyclic force applications can reduce this deterioration and possibly

rehab them if you have the problem. "

I might also add that you need to be aware of training joint tissues like

cartilages. As we age, they thin and become porous. ONLY, well selected

cyclic force applications can reduce this deterioration and possibly rehab

them if you have the problem. And this message is not just for Geezers like

me, but should be heeded by those who wish to forestall the problems.

Edwin Freeman, Jr.

San Francisco, USA

[Guest guest]

How does one train to reduce cartilage deterioration? You mentioned " well

selected cyclic force applications can reduce this deterioration and possibly

rehab them if you have the problem. "

I might also add that you need to be aware of training joint tissues like

cartilages. As we age, they thin and become porous. ONLY, well selected

cyclic force applications can reduce this deterioration and possibly rehab

them if you have the problem. And this message is not just for Geezers like

me, but should be heeded by those who wish to forestall the problems.

Edwin Freeman, Jr.

San Francisco, USA

[Guest guest]

I got into rowing to supplement my cycling.  Rowing does involve the entire

body from head to toes.  Unfortunately the rowing put great strain on my knees

and resulted in a torn meniscus. I suspect in part due to poor form on my part.

 

I suspect that most of my injuries were self inflicted.  I have a tendency to

push too hard at times. 

With regards to blood pressure and resistance training you are correct.  I did

a posting on this within the past two years. 

 As with any exercise it is best to start low and go slow.

Resistance training, in my opinion, does not have to entail just using weights.

 When I ride my bicycle up the side of a mountain I am doing a lot of

resistance training on my legs. Rowing can  also be considered a form

resistance training.   

Ralph Giarnella MD

Southington Ct. USA 

 

________________________________

From: " efreem3407@... " <efreem3407@...>

Supertraining

Sent: Monday, November 14, 2011 12:25 PM

Subject: Re: Is physical frailty inevitable as we grow older?

 

Wow you were in a very intense sport. Rowing is very intense. I've tried

rowing on a rowing machine at the gym and boy oh boy my whole body was sore

after an hour's worth of training. And that's with a trainer at the gym helping

me. I don't get that sore after lifting weights.

I think people at any age can do some weight training. Weight training doesn't

have to mean heavy powerlifting or weightlifting. Weight training just means

some kind of resistance training. I have heard that in unfit persons weight

training can cause blood pressure to rise so it's best to start with cardio and

then work up to weight training. Would you agree with this doctor?

Edwin Freeman, Jr.

San Francisco, USA

Re: Is physical frailty inevitable as we grow older?

Sigh. Runners.

These folks went about it the hard way with runners, they might have just looked

at older PL and OL who are quite handy still at sport and also clearly not

" frail " . One of my favorite " geezer " lifters is a guy who looks like Santa Claus

and is from Norway - I still suspect this guy loads up the sleigh and hands out

toys, he's so darned fit... he'd have to add on the gut to look the part in

popular depictions though...

My hope for a healthy and not frail future is to ignore the BMI nonsense and

keep lifting.

One reason for hope for the lifter is that they had to add age groups due to

demand at the high end of the age brackets...and as I've said before, if Grandma

wants to deadlift, hand her the chalk and teach her good form. (And for

safety's sake, teach Grandpa too.... )

Shorter's physique in the past few years was clearly not the result of

just running.... how obvious is it that the answer to not being frail is to keep

moving, but also to use weights?

The authors might have just followed around the camera crew for the show " Are

You Fitter than a Senior " (aired this year on a cable network and probably

trademarked or other copyright). They took out of shape UK young adults and

matched them up against folks in retirement communities quite determined to stay

fit by exercise - and it was clear there are a lot of folks in decent shape in

the geezer ranks...and quite out of shape younger folk. Some of the folks they

had in that show were quite impressive in physique and fitness level...!

With hope for a strong and healthy future for me and the rest of our vaunted

List Members...

The Phantom

aka Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter

Denver, Colorado, USA

Is physical frailty inevitable as we grow older?

Members may wish to add their insights:

Is physical frailty inevitable as we grow older?

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/09/aging-well-through-exercise/

That question preoccupies scientists and the middle-aged, particularly when they

become the same people. Until recently, the evidence was disheartening. A large

number of studies in the past few years showed that after age 40, people

typically lose 8 percent or more of their muscle mass each decade, a process

that accelerates significantly after age 70. Less muscle mass generally means

less strength, mobility and among the elderly, independence. It also has been

linked with premature mortality.

But a growing body of newer science suggests that such decline may not be

inexorable. Exercise, the thinking goes, and you might be able to rewrite the

future for your muscles.

Consider the results of a stirring study published last month in the journal The

Physician and Sportsmedicine. For it, researchers at the University of

Pittsburgh recruited 40 competitive runners, cyclists and swimmers. They ranged

in age from 40 to 81, with five men and five women representing each of four age

groups: 40 to 49, 50 to 59, 60 to 69, and 70-plus. All were enviably fit,

training four or five times a week and competing frequently. Several had won

their age groups in recent races.

They completed questionnaires detailing their health and weekly physical

activities. Then the researchers measured their muscle mass, leg strength and

body composition, determining how much of their body and, more specifically,

their muscle tissue was composed of fat. Other studies have found that as people

age, they not only lose muscle, but the tissue that remains can become

infiltrated with fat, degrading its quality and reducing its strength.

There was little evidence of deterioration in the older athletes' musculature,

however. The athletes in their 70s and 80s had almost as much thigh muscle mass

as the athletes in their 40s, with minor if any fat infiltration. The athletes

also remained strong. There was, as scientists noted, a drop-off in leg muscle

strength around age 60 in both men and women. They weren't as strong as the

50-year-olds, but the differential was not huge, and little additional decline

followed. The 70- and 80-year-old athletes were about as strong as those in

their 60s.

" We think these are very encouraging results, " said Dr. Vonda , an

orthopedic surgeon and founder of the Performance and Research Initiative for

Masters Athletes at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, who oversaw the

study. " They suggest strongly that people don't have to lose muscle mass and

function as they grow older. The changes that we've assumed were due to aging

and therefore were unstoppable seem actually to be caused by inactivity. And

that can be changed. "

Other recent studies have produced similar findings. Last year, researchers at

the Canadian Centre for Activity and Aging, for instance, examined muscle tissue

from older competitive runners, checking for the density of their motor units, a

measure of muscle health. A motor unit is, essentially, the control mechanism of

a functioning muscle, composed of a neuron and the particular muscle fibers that

that neuron activates. The more motor units in a muscle, the stronger it

generally is.

In multiple earlier studies, people over 50 have been found to possess far fewer

muscle motor units than young adults. But that wasn't true for the sexagenarian

runners, whose leg muscles teemed with almost as many motor units as a separate

group of active 25-year-olds. Running, the scientists wrote, seemed able to

" mitigate the loss of motor units with aging well into the seventh decade of

life. "

Of course, the volunteers in both Dr. 's and the Canadian study were, for

the most part, lifelong athletes. Whether similar benefits are attainable by

people who take up exercise when they are middle-aged or older " isn't yet

clear, " Dr. says, " although there's no reason to think that you wouldn't

get similar results no matter when you start. "

In an encouraging animal study from last year, elderly rats that had been

sedentary throughout their adult lives were put on a running program. After 13

weeks, their leg muscle tissues had filled with new satellite cells, a

specialized type of stem cell that is known to build and repair muscle.

Comparable experiments in older people have yet to be done, though.

Other questions about the impacts of exercise on aging muscle also remain

unanswered. " We don't know what kinds of exercise are best, " Dr. says

and, in particular, whether endurance exercise is necessary for muscle sparing

or whether weight training might be as good or better. Scientists also haven't

determined just how much activity is required to maintain muscle mass, or how

intense it needs to be.

" What we can say with certainty is that any activity is better than none, " Dr.

says, " and more is probably better than less. But the bigger message is

that it looks as if how we age can be under our control. Through exercise, you

can preserve muscle mass and strength and avoid the decline from vitality to

frailty. "

================

Carruthers

Wakefield, UK

[Guest guest]

I got into rowing to supplement my cycling.  Rowing does involve the entire

body from head to toes.  Unfortunately the rowing put great strain on my knees

and resulted in a torn meniscus. I suspect in part due to poor form on my part.

 

I suspect that most of my injuries were self inflicted.  I have a tendency to

push too hard at times. 

With regards to blood pressure and resistance training you are correct.  I did

a posting on this within the past two years. 

 As with any exercise it is best to start low and go slow.

Resistance training, in my opinion, does not have to entail just using weights.

 When I ride my bicycle up the side of a mountain I am doing a lot of

resistance training on my legs. Rowing can  also be considered a form

resistance training.   

Ralph Giarnella MD

Southington Ct. USA 

 

________________________________

From: " efreem3407@... " <efreem3407@...>

Supertraining

Sent: Monday, November 14, 2011 12:25 PM

Subject: Re: Is physical frailty inevitable as we grow older?

 

Wow you were in a very intense sport. Rowing is very intense. I've tried

rowing on a rowing machine at the gym and boy oh boy my whole body was sore

after an hour's worth of training. And that's with a trainer at the gym helping

me. I don't get that sore after lifting weights.

I think people at any age can do some weight training. Weight training doesn't

have to mean heavy powerlifting or weightlifting. Weight training just means

some kind of resistance training. I have heard that in unfit persons weight

training can cause blood pressure to rise so it's best to start with cardio and

then work up to weight training. Would you agree with this doctor?

Edwin Freeman, Jr.

San Francisco, USA

Re: Is physical frailty inevitable as we grow older?

Sigh. Runners.

These folks went about it the hard way with runners, they might have just looked

at older PL and OL who are quite handy still at sport and also clearly not

" frail " . One of my favorite " geezer " lifters is a guy who looks like Santa Claus

and is from Norway - I still suspect this guy loads up the sleigh and hands out

toys, he's so darned fit... he'd have to add on the gut to look the part in

popular depictions though...

My hope for a healthy and not frail future is to ignore the BMI nonsense and

keep lifting.

One reason for hope for the lifter is that they had to add age groups due to

demand at the high end of the age brackets...and as I've said before, if Grandma

wants to deadlift, hand her the chalk and teach her good form. (And for

safety's sake, teach Grandpa too.... )

Shorter's physique in the past few years was clearly not the result of

just running.... how obvious is it that the answer to not being frail is to keep

moving, but also to use weights?

The authors might have just followed around the camera crew for the show " Are

You Fitter than a Senior " (aired this year on a cable network and probably

trademarked or other copyright). They took out of shape UK young adults and

matched them up against folks in retirement communities quite determined to stay

fit by exercise - and it was clear there are a lot of folks in decent shape in

the geezer ranks...and quite out of shape younger folk. Some of the folks they

had in that show were quite impressive in physique and fitness level...!

With hope for a strong and healthy future for me and the rest of our vaunted

List Members...

The Phantom

aka Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter

Denver, Colorado, USA

Is physical frailty inevitable as we grow older?

Members may wish to add their insights:

Is physical frailty inevitable as we grow older?

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/09/aging-well-through-exercise/

That question preoccupies scientists and the middle-aged, particularly when they

become the same people. Until recently, the evidence was disheartening. A large

number of studies in the past few years showed that after age 40, people

typically lose 8 percent or more of their muscle mass each decade, a process

that accelerates significantly after age 70. Less muscle mass generally means

less strength, mobility and among the elderly, independence. It also has been

linked with premature mortality.

But a growing body of newer science suggests that such decline may not be

inexorable. Exercise, the thinking goes, and you might be able to rewrite the

future for your muscles.

Consider the results of a stirring study published last month in the journal The

Physician and Sportsmedicine. For it, researchers at the University of

Pittsburgh recruited 40 competitive runners, cyclists and swimmers. They ranged

in age from 40 to 81, with five men and five women representing each of four age

groups: 40 to 49, 50 to 59, 60 to 69, and 70-plus. All were enviably fit,

training four or five times a week and competing frequently. Several had won

their age groups in recent races.

They completed questionnaires detailing their health and weekly physical

activities. Then the researchers measured their muscle mass, leg strength and

body composition, determining how much of their body and, more specifically,

their muscle tissue was composed of fat. Other studies have found that as people

age, they not only lose muscle, but the tissue that remains can become

infiltrated with fat, degrading its quality and reducing its strength.

There was little evidence of deterioration in the older athletes' musculature,

however. The athletes in their 70s and 80s had almost as much thigh muscle mass

as the athletes in their 40s, with minor if any fat infiltration. The athletes

also remained strong. There was, as scientists noted, a drop-off in leg muscle

strength around age 60 in both men and women. They weren't as strong as the

50-year-olds, but the differential was not huge, and little additional decline

followed. The 70- and 80-year-old athletes were about as strong as those in

their 60s.

" We think these are very encouraging results, " said Dr. Vonda , an

orthopedic surgeon and founder of the Performance and Research Initiative for

Masters Athletes at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, who oversaw the

study. " They suggest strongly that people don't have to lose muscle mass and

function as they grow older. The changes that we've assumed were due to aging

and therefore were unstoppable seem actually to be caused by inactivity. And

that can be changed. "

Other recent studies have produced similar findings. Last year, researchers at

the Canadian Centre for Activity and Aging, for instance, examined muscle tissue

from older competitive runners, checking for the density of their motor units, a

measure of muscle health. A motor unit is, essentially, the control mechanism of

a functioning muscle, composed of a neuron and the particular muscle fibers that

that neuron activates. The more motor units in a muscle, the stronger it

generally is.

In multiple earlier studies, people over 50 have been found to possess far fewer

muscle motor units than young adults. But that wasn't true for the sexagenarian

runners, whose leg muscles teemed with almost as many motor units as a separate

group of active 25-year-olds. Running, the scientists wrote, seemed able to

" mitigate the loss of motor units with aging well into the seventh decade of

life. "

Of course, the volunteers in both Dr. 's and the Canadian study were, for

the most part, lifelong athletes. Whether similar benefits are attainable by

people who take up exercise when they are middle-aged or older " isn't yet

clear, " Dr. says, " although there's no reason to think that you wouldn't

get similar results no matter when you start. "

In an encouraging animal study from last year, elderly rats that had been

sedentary throughout their adult lives were put on a running program. After 13

weeks, their leg muscle tissues had filled with new satellite cells, a

specialized type of stem cell that is known to build and repair muscle.

Comparable experiments in older people have yet to be done, though.

Other questions about the impacts of exercise on aging muscle also remain

unanswered. " We don't know what kinds of exercise are best, " Dr. says

and, in particular, whether endurance exercise is necessary for muscle sparing

or whether weight training might be as good or better. Scientists also haven't

determined just how much activity is required to maintain muscle mass, or how

intense it needs to be.

" What we can say with certainty is that any activity is better than none, " Dr.

says, " and more is probably better than less. But the bigger message is

that it looks as if how we age can be under our control. Through exercise, you

can preserve muscle mass and strength and avoid the decline from vitality to

frailty. "

================

Carruthers

Wakefield, UK

[Guest guest]

I think it's important to not confuse the definition and concept of " resistance

training " , physiologically. Resistance training is primarily designed to

increase muscular strength. While it can play a role in increasing muscular

endurance, rowing and bicycling as described below are not really resistance

training, i.e. progressive resistance exercise. Instead, they are

cardiorespiratory (CR) or aerobic exercise by virtue of the energy systems used

and the duration of the effort.

If I have a person squat or do leg presses with an appropriate load for 2-4

minutes straight or longer, presuming the person can keep it up, by definition

it becomes CR exercise: the aerobic pathways become the primary suppliers of

energy to the working muscles. When the effort increases--like cycling up a

mountainside--more muscle fibers that primarily use anaerobic pathways will kick

in. Eventually you'll come to a new steady state while still moving (at

whatever speed) or your muscles will force you to stop and rest while they catch

up on buffering the metabolic acid that builds up.

So while cycling or rowing can offer resistance, they should not be considered

forms of resistance training.

Merrick, Ph.D.

Bellevue, NE

ACSM HFS

NSCA-CPT/CSCS

>

> I got into rowing to supplement my cycling. Rowing does involve the entire

body from head to toes. Unfortunately the rowing put great strain on my knees

and resulted in a torn meniscus. I suspect in part due to poor form on my part. 

>

> I suspect that most of my injuries were self inflicted. I have a tendency to

push too hard at times.

>

> With regards to blood pressure and resistance training you are correct. I did

a posting on this within the past two years.  

> As with any exercise it is best to start low and go slow.

> Resistance training, in my opinion, does not have to entail just using

weights. When I ride my bicycle up the side of a mountain I am doing a lot of

resistance training on my legs. Rowing can also be considered a form resistance

training.  

> Ralph Giarnella MD

> Southington Ct.  

> (material deleted)

[Guest guest]

The term cardiovascular implies that only the cardiovascular system is improved.

 Endurance exercise implies that only endurance is improved. Neither term

addresses the change in muscle strength and size that occurs with either or both

types of exercise.

I can guarantee you that rowing and mountain biking also increase overall

strength and size of the muscles involved. I realize that for reason of easy

categorization of exercise that we conventionally separate the areas of exercise

into CV, End or Resistance.

For most on this forum resistance training means use of weights.  However

resistance training can take other forms.

A study often quoted in this forum to justify use of  resistance training for

endurance sports (Paavolainen study)  uses explosive strength training which

more closely resembles  endurance training and is not what most on this forum

would consider traditional resistance exercise. Below is the description of the

protocol for experimental group in the Paavolainen study.

***************************************

Explosive-strength training improves 5-km running time by improving running

economy and muscle power

1. Leena Paavolainen1, Keijo Häkkinen2, Ismo Hämäläinen1, Ari Nummela1, and

Heikki Rusko

Explosive-strength training sessions lasted for 15–90 min and consisted of

various sprints (5-10) ⋅ (20–100 m) and jumping exercises [alternative

jumps, bilateral countermovement, drop and hurdle jumps, and 1-legged, 5-jump

(5J) tests] without additional weight or with the barbell on the shoulders and

leg-press and knee extensor-flexor exercises with low loads but high or maximal

movement velocities (30–200 contractions/training session and 5–20

repetitions/set). The load of the exercises ranged between 0 and 40% of the

one-repetition maximum. 

********************************

For the complete study you can read it at(

 http://jap.physiology.org/content/86/5/1527.full )

The mountain bikers, road racers and rowers do similar types of workouts as

described in Paavolainen study except they are done on a bicycle or rowing

machine. 

I agree that Mountain biking or rowing cannot be classified as classic

resistance training by they can, in an unconventional way, be considered

resistance training.  They do produce increase strength and size, and not just

metabolic changes, in the stimulated muscle groups.  

Ralph Giarnella MD

Southington Ct. USA 

________________________________

From: samuel9888 <Sam68123@...>

Supertraining

Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 9:17 AM

Subject: Re: Is physical frailty inevitable as we grow older?

 

I think it's important to not confuse the definition and concept of " resistance

training " , physiologically. Resistance training is primarily designed to

increase muscular strength. While it can play a role in increasing muscular

endurance, rowing and bicycling as described below are not really resistance

training, i.e. progressive resistance exercise. Instead, they are

cardiorespiratory (CR) or aerobic exercise by virtue of the energy systems used

and the duration of the effort.

If I have a person squat or do leg presses with an appropriate load for 2-4

minutes straight or longer, presuming the person can keep it up, by definition

it becomes CR exercise: the aerobic pathways become the primary suppliers of

energy to the working muscles. When the effort increases--like cycling up a

mountainside--more muscle fibers that primarily use anaerobic pathways will kick

in. Eventually you'll come to a new steady state while still moving (at

whatever speed) or your muscles will force you to stop and rest while they catch

up on buffering the metabolic acid that builds up.

So while cycling or rowing can offer resistance, they should not be considered

forms of resistance training.

Merrick, Ph.D.

Bellevue, NE

ACSM HFS

NSCA-CPT/CSCS

>

> I got into rowing to supplement my cycling. Rowing does involve the entire

body from head to toes. Unfortunately the rowing put great strain on my knees

and resulted in a torn meniscus. I suspect in part due to poor form on my

part. 

>

> I suspect that most of my injuries were self inflicted. I have a tendency to

push too hard at times.

>

> With regards to blood pressure and resistance training you are correct. I did

a posting on this within the past two years.  

> As with any exercise it is best to start low and go slow.

> Resistance training, in my opinion, does not have to entail just using

weights. When I ride my bicycle up the side of a mountain I am doing a lot of

resistance training on my legs. Rowing can also be considered a form resistance

training.  

> Ralph Giarnella MD

> Southington Ct.  

> (material deleted)

[Guest guest]

The following article might be appropriate to this discussion.

One question: does any one now what is meant by " low-intensity blood flow

restriction(BFR) exercise " ?

Ralph Giarnella MD

Southington Ct. USA 

*********************

Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise:

December 2011 - Volume 43 - Issue 12 - p 2249–2258

doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e318223b037

Basic Sciences

Exercise, Amino Acids, and Aging in the Control of Human Muscle Protein

Synthesis

WALKER, DILLON K.1,2; DICKINSON, JARED M.1,2; TIMMERMAN, KYLE L.1,2,3; DRUMMOND,

MICAH J.1,2,3; REIDY, PAUL T.1,2; FRY, CHRISTOPHER S.1,2; GUNDERMANN, DAVID

M.1,2; RASMUSSEN, BLAKE B.1,2,3

Abstract

ABSTRACT: In this review, we discuss recent research in the field of human

skeletal muscle protein metabolism characterizing the acute regulation of

mammalian target of rapamycin complex (mTORC) 1 signaling and muscle protein

synthesis (MPS) by exercise, amino acid nutrition, and aging. 

Resistance exercise performed in the fasted state stimulates mixed MPS within 1

h after exercise, which can remain elevated for 48 h. We demonstrate that the

activation of mTORC1 signaling (and subsequently enhanced translation

initiation) is required for the contraction-induced increase in MPS. 

In comparison, low-intensity blood flow restriction (BFR) exercise stimulates

MPS and mTORC1 signaling to an extent similar to traditional, high-intensity

resistance exercise. 

We also show that mTORC1 signaling is required for the essential amino acid

(EAA)–induced increase in MPS. 

Ingestion of EAAs (or protein) shortly after resistance exercise enhances MPS

and mTORC1 signaling compared with resistance exercise or EAAs alone. 

In older adults, the ability of the skeletal muscle to respond to anabolic

stimuli is impaired. For example, in response to an acute bout of resistance

exercise, older adults are less able to activate mTORC1 or increase MPS during

the first 24 h of postexercise recovery. 

However, BFR exercise can overcome this impairment. Aging is not associated with

a reduced response to EAAs provided the EAA content is sufficient. Therefore, we

propose that exercise combined with EAA should be effective not only in

improving muscle repair and growth in response to training in athletes, but that

strategies such as EAA combined with resistance exercise (or BFR exercise) may

be very useful as a countermeasure for sarcopenia and other clinical conditions

associated with muscle wasting.

[Guest guest]

Also known as " Kaatsu " training, it involves restricting blood flow proximally

to the muscles being worked with a tourniquet or pressurized cuff and using

lighter loads.

There is quite a bit of research being conducted on the methodology: I saw quite

a few poster presentations on it at the American College of Sports Medicine

Annual Meeting this year. For published research, you might have to search

Google Scholar or Pubmed on the generic term " blood flow restriction exercise " .

Merrick, Ph.D.

Bellevue

>

> The following article might be appropriate to this discussion.

> One question: does any one now what is meant by " low-intensity blood flow

restriction(BFR) exercise " ?

> Ralph Giarnella MD

> Southington Ct. USA 

> *********************

> Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise:

> December 2011 - Volume 43 - Issue 12 - p 2249†" 2258

> doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e318223b037

> Basic Sciences

> Exercise, Amino Acids, and Aging in the Control of Human Muscle Protein

Synthesis

> WALKER, DILLON K.1,2; DICKINSON, JARED M.1,2; TIMMERMAN, KYLE L.1,2,3;

DRUMMOND, MICAH J.1,2,3; REIDY, PAUL T.1,2; FRY, CHRISTOPHER S.1,2; GUNDERMANN,

DAVID M.1,2; RASMUSSEN, BLAKE B.1,2,3

>

>

> Abstract

>

> ABSTRACT: In this review, we discuss recent research in the field of human

skeletal muscle protein metabolism characterizing the acute regulation of

mammalian target of rapamycin complex (mTORC) 1 signaling and muscle protein

synthesis (MPS) by exercise, amino acid nutrition, and aging. 

> Resistance exercise performed in the fasted state stimulates mixed MPS within

1 h after exercise, which can remain elevated for 48 h. We demonstrate that the

activation of mTORC1 signaling (and subsequently enhanced translation

initiation) is required for the contraction-induced increase in MPS. 

> In comparison, low-intensity blood flow restriction (BFR) exercise stimulates

MPS and mTORC1 signaling to an extent similar to traditional, high-intensity

resistance exercise. 

> We also show that mTORC1 signaling is required for the essential amino acid

(EAA)†" induced increase in MPS. 

> Ingestion of EAAs (or protein) shortly after resistance exercise enhances MPS

and mTORC1 signaling compared with resistance exercise or EAAs alone. 

> In older adults, the ability of the skeletal muscle to respond to anabolic

stimuli is impaired. For example, in response to an acute bout of resistance

exercise, older adults are less able to activate mTORC1 or increase MPS during

the first 24 h of postexercise recovery. 

> However, BFR exercise can overcome this impairment. Aging is not associated

with a reduced response to EAAs provided the EAA content is sufficient.

Therefore, we propose that exercise combined with EAA should be effective not

only in improving muscle repair and growth in response to training in athletes,

but that strategies such as EAA combined with resistance exercise (or BFR

exercise) may be very useful as a countermeasure for sarcopenia and other

clinical conditions associated with muscle wasting.

>

>

[Guest guest]

As I recall from many texts on resistance training (RT), muscle adapatation is

not either/or, but instead a continuum from absolute strength of 1 RM to muscle

endurance of NN (indefinite)RM. Improving muscle strength--say 3-5RM will also

end up improving muscle endurance. Improving muscle endurance will also have an

effect on muscle size and strength. Also, both heavy load RT and explosive RT

with lighter loads have a role in improving performance even in sports that are

primarily endurance--running, cycling, etc.

I don't dispute that there will be some incidental increase in muscle size and

strength from rowing and mountain biking alone compared to a baseline state.

The muscle tissues recruited will respond as a whole to the stimulus:

metabolically, structurally, neurologically, etc. For example, half of the

improvements seen in VO2max from aerobic exercise result from adaptations within

the working muscles themselves. However such activities--long duration, limited

posture/range of motion, steady state (perhaps with occasional intense

bursts)--will not recruit motor units and their innervated muscle fibers to the

same extent that RT does.

I agree that RT doesn't always have to mean " weights " , but it does mean

progressive resistance or techniques with body weight, elastic resistance,

manual resistance, or weights designed to enhance the muscles' response to the

training.

Also, I had said " cardiorespiratory " , not " cardiovascular " since the central

component (as opposed to the peripheral component of the working muscles) of

aerobic exercise involves more than just the heart and circulatory system.

American College of Sports Medicine uses " cardiorespiratory " in their latest

(2011, MSSE, p. 1334-1359) position stand:

" Quantity and Quality of Exercise for Developing and Maintaining

Cardiorespiratory, Musculoskeletal, and Neuromotor Fitness in

Apparently Healthy Adults: Guidance for Prescribing Exercise "

Merrick, Ph.D.

Bellevue, NE

>

> The term cardiovascular implies that only the cardiovascular system is

improved. Endurance exercise implies that only endurance is improved. Neither

term addresses the change in muscle strength and size that occurs with either or

both types of exercise.

>

> I can guarantee you that rowing and mountain biking also increase overall

strength and size of the muscles involved. I realize that for reason of easy

categorization of exercise that we conventionally separate the areas of exercise

into CV, End or Resistance.

>

> For most on this forum resistance training means use of weights.  However

resistance training can take other forms.

>

> A study often quoted in this forum to justify use of resistance training for

endurance sports (Paavolainen study) uses explosive strength training which more

closely resembles endurance training and is not what most on this forum would

consider traditional resistance exercise. Below is the description of the

protocol for experimental group in the Paavolainen study.

> ***************************************

> Explosive-strength training improves 5-km running time by improving running

economy and muscle power

> 1. Leena Paavolainen1, Keijo Häkkinen2, Ismo Hämäläinen1, Ari Nummela1,

and Heikki Rusko

> Explosive-strength training sessions lasted for 15†" 90 min and consisted of

various sprints (5-10) ⋅ (20†" 100 m) and jumping exercises [alternative

jumps, bilateral countermovement, drop and hurdle jumps, and 1-legged, 5-jump

(5J) tests] without additional weight or with the barbell on the shoulders and

leg-press and knee extensor-flexor exercises with low loads but high or maximal

movement velocities (30†" 200 contractions/training session and 5†" 20

repetitions/set). The load of the exercises ranged between 0 and 40% of the

one-repetition maximum. 

> ********************************

> For the complete study you can read it at(

 http://jap.physiology.org/content/86/5/1527.full )

> The mountain bikers, road racers and rowers do similar types of workouts as

described in Paavolainen study except they are done on a bicycle or rowing

machine. 

> I agree that Mountain biking or rowing cannot be classified as classic

resistance training by they can, in an unconventional way, be considered

resistance training. They do produce increase strength and size, and not just

metabolic changes, in the stimulated muscle groups.  

>

> Ralph Giarnella MD

> Southington Ct. USA 

>

>

> ________________________________

> From: samuel9888 <Sam68123@...>

> Supertraining

> Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 9:17 AM

> Subject: Re: Is physical frailty inevitable as we grow older?

>  

> I think it's important to not confuse the definition and concept of

" resistance training " , physiologically. Resistance training is primarily

designed to increase muscular strength. While it can play a role in increasing

muscular endurance, rowing and bicycling as described below are not really

resistance training, i.e. progressive resistance exercise. Instead, they are

cardiorespiratory (CR) or aerobic exercise by virtue of the energy systems used

and the duration of the effort.

>

> If I have a person squat or do leg presses with an appropriate load for 2-4

minutes straight or longer, presuming the person can keep it up, by definition

it becomes CR exercise: the aerobic pathways become the primary suppliers of

energy to the working muscles. When the effort increases--like cycling up a

mountainside--more muscle fibers that primarily use anaerobic pathways will kick

in. Eventually you'll come to a new steady state while still moving (at

whatever speed) or your muscles will force you to stop and rest while they catch

up on buffering the metabolic acid that builds up.

>

> So while cycling or rowing can offer resistance, they should not be considered

forms of resistance training.

>

> Merrick, Ph.D.

> Bellevue, NE

> ACSM HFS

> NSCA-CPT/CSCS

(material deleted)

[Guest guest]

Hi ,

Overall, I agree with your distinction of " strength training " to describe a

subset of resistance training (RT) aimed at increasing muscular strength.

Manipulation of variables of activity, load, and duration will determine the

nature and extent of adaptations that take place according to the SAID

principle. My follow up post might have been more clear about the continuum of

RT.

My primary goal had been to avoid categorizing activities that are primarily

aerobic, endurance activities (like rowing and mountain biking) as resistance

training just because they involve some element of resistance. Walking/running

up a hill, or swimming also involve resistance, but I wouldn't call them

resistance training. Often I've spoken to recreational runners who eschew RT

for their legs bacause they think that running alone gives them all the exercise

they need for their legs. We both know, however, that RT has many additional

benefits for their legs, even if they aren't interested in improving

performance.

If I used a pie to picture the contribution of cardiorespiratory (CR)fitness,

musculoskeltal fitness (MS), and neuromotor fitness (NM)--the three categories

of the ACSM position stand--to a particular activity, the CR component would by

far be the largest proportion for anything of significant duration. In

contrast, how would you divide the same pie for rock climbing? Or any other

activity? An interesting way to picture a needs analysis for any particular

sports/position within a sport. Just to clarify, exercise for MS fitness in the

position stand includes strength training and flexibility exercise.

Thank you for the dialog!

Merrick, Ph.D.

Bellevue, NE

>

> I think it's important to not confuse the definition and concept of

> " resistance training " , physiologically. Resistance training is primarily

designed to increase muscular strength.

>

> Casler writes:

>

> Hi while I most often agree with you, I might suggest that

> " resistance training " is simply a term used to describe a type of training

including the component of a resistive load. The actual physiology will be

based on the sum components of the training.

>

> I think the term that best describes what you are suggesting is " Strength

Training " which would have the training components and physiological adaptations

to muscular strength.

>

> I would certainly agree that if a stimulus was increased via additional

resistance to movement that a Strength increase would be the adaptation. This

could come from virtually any form of resistive load, from the brake on an

ergometer, to a barbell.

>

> When we observe the components of training: Load - Duration - Distance, we see

that it is the various combinations of these that then cause the physiological

stimuli. These stimuli then determine the specific adaptations(SAID)and the

extent of the adaptations.

>

> I might also add that I agree that we know that Endurance and Strength are

often adapations of training goals and conditioning applications of

Load/Duration/Distance, and will further determine the balance of the

adaptations to each. However, I think it incorrect to suggest that Resistance

Training and Strength Training are one in the same relative to their specific

definitions or physiology.

>

> Hope that makes sense.

>

> Regards,

>

> Casler

> TRI-VECTOR 3-D Training Systems

> Century City, CA

>(material deleted)

[Guest guest]

,

Thank you for sharing, but with all due respect, the statement you made only

adds TO the confusion in the exercise industry and are highly debateable and in

some cases, completely wrong. Call it whatever you want  i.e. pilates, hiking,

Cycling, Rowing, cooking dinner, massage, carrying grocieries, yoga, resistance,

cardio, endurance, etc etc etc. The stimulus is ALWAYS force(M x A). And all of

its associated components/properties(i.e. gravity, inertia, etc)We live in a

newtonian world. The human body is a big system of levers(effort,

resistance, axis). Whether I bend my knee 10 times and call it

resistance/squat, or bend it for 30 mins and call it

endurance/cardio/running.....Bending the knee is bending the knee and the

muscles that are required to work depends on the force and how it is transmitted

to the body(direction, magnitude, point of application). The heart is just a

pump. It sends blood to where it is needed.....In this case, the

emphasized(working) muscles. There's nothing magical that comes in and

challenges the hearts ability to beat with something called " cardio " vs.

something called " resistance " So, cardio is just as much resistance as

.....resistance is resistance(It's all force). It's ALL resistance(Force). Its

simply the adaptations to that stimulus that are different. For you to define

one or the other on the basis of time or to use words like " not really " make

these statements opinions and/or circumstance, situation, scenario specific at

best.

Lastly, just a few questions:

-You stated " I think it's important to not confuse the definition and concept of

" resistance training " , physiologically. " What would resistance training

non-physiologically be?????

-how do you define muscular strength(i.e 1 rm, 2 rm, 5 rm 10 rep max, 100 rep

max, 0-2mins?)

-what wouldn't be CR exercise ??

-What if it was for 1:59 secs. Is that " resistance " instead of " cardio " ? How

about 1:55secs? 1:30secs? 4:01secs?

 

 

Thank you

Jerry

Lake , FL

 

 

From: samuel9888 <Sam68123@...>

Supertraining

Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 8:17 AM

Subject: Re: Is physical frailty inevitable as we grow older?

 

I think it's important to not confuse the definition and concept of " resistance

training " , physiologically. Resistance training is primarily designed to

increase muscular strength. While it can play a role in increasing muscular

endurance, rowing and bicycling as described below are not really resistance

training, i.e. progressive resistance exercise. Instead, they are

cardiorespiratory (CR) or aerobic exercise by virtue of the energy systems used

and the duration of the effort.

If I have a person squat or do leg presses with an appropriate load for 2-4

minutes straight or longer, presuming the person can keep it up, by definition

it becomes CR exercise: the aerobic pathways become the primary suppliers of

energy to the working muscles. When the effort increases--like cycling up a

mountainside--more muscle fibers that primarily use anaerobic pathways will kick

in. Eventually you'll come to a new steady state while still moving (at whatever

speed) or your muscles will force you to stop and rest while they catch up on

buffering the metabolic acid that builds up.

So while cycling or rowing can offer resistance, they should not be considered

forms of resistance training.

Merrick, Ph.D.

Bellevue, NE

ACSM HFS

NSCA-CPT/CSCS

>

> I got into rowing to supplement my cycling. Rowing does involve the entire

body from head to toes. Unfortunately the rowing put great strain on my knees

and resulted in a torn meniscus. I suspect in part due to poor form on my

part. 

>

> I suspect that most of my injuries were self inflicted. I have a tendency to

push too hard at times.

>

> With regards to blood pressure and resistance training you are correct. I did

a posting on this within the past two years.  

> As with any exercise it is best to start low and go slow.

> Resistance training, in my opinion, does not have to entail just using

weights. When I ride my bicycle up the side of a mountain I am doing a lot of

resistance training on my legs. Rowing can also be considered a form resistance

training.  

> Ralph Giarnella MD

> Southington Ct.  

> (material deleted)

[Guest guest]

/,

Wasn't the SAID principle, in its original intent, proprosed for energy

systems(cpp, gly, kreb) and not muscular strength? If I remember right, i

believe it was?? Just curious.

 

Jerry

Lake , FL

 

________________________________

From: samuel9888 <Sam68123@...>

Supertraining

Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2011 10:03 AM

Subject: Re: Is physical frailty inevitable as we grow older?

 

Hi ,

Overall, I agree with your distinction of " strength training " to describe a

subset of resistance training (RT) aimed at increasing muscular strength.

Manipulation of variables of activity, load, and duration will determine the

nature and extent of adaptations that take place according to the SAID

principle. My follow up post might have been more clear about the continuum of

RT.

My primary goal had been to avoid categorizing activities that are primarily

aerobic, endurance activities (like rowing and mountain biking) as resistance

training just because they involve some element of resistance. Walking/running

up a hill, or swimming also involve resistance, but I wouldn't call them

resistance training. Often I've spoken to recreational runners who eschew RT for

their legs bacause they think that running alone gives them all the exercise

they need for their legs. We both know, however, that RT has many additional

benefits for their legs, even if they aren't interested in improving

performance.

If I used a pie to picture the contribution of cardiorespiratory (CR)fitness,

musculoskeltal fitness (MS), and neuromotor fitness (NM)--the three categories

of the ACSM position stand--to a particular activity, the CR component would by

far be the largest proportion for anything of significant duration. In contrast,

how would you divide the same pie for rock climbing? Or any other activity? An

interesting way to picture a needs analysis for any particular sports/position

within a sport. Just to clarify, exercise for MS fitness in the position stand

includes strength training and flexibility exercise.

Thank you for the dialog!

Merrick, Ph.D.

Bellevue, NE

>

> I think it's important to not confuse the definition and concept of

> " resistance training " , physiologically. Resistance training is primarily

designed to increase muscular strength.

>

> Casler writes:

>

> Hi while I most often agree with you, I might suggest that

> " resistance training " is simply a term used to describe a type of training

including the component of a resistive load. The actual physiology will be based

on the sum components of the training.

>

> I think the term that best describes what you are suggesting is " Strength

Training " which would have the training components and physiological adaptations

to muscular strength.

>

> I would certainly agree that if a stimulus was increased via additional

resistance to movement that a Strength increase would be the adaptation. This

could come from virtually any form of resistive load, from the brake on an

ergometer, to a barbell.

>

> When we observe the components of training: Load - Duration - Distance, we see

that it is the various combinations of these that then cause the physiological

stimuli. These stimuli then determine the specific adaptations(SAID)and the

extent of the adaptations.

>

> I might also add that I agree that we know that Endurance and Strength are

often adapations of training goals and conditioning applications of

Load/Duration/Distance, and will further determine the balance of the

adaptations to each. However, I think it incorrect to suggest that Resistance

Training and Strength Training are one in the same relative to their specific

definitions or physiology.

>

> Hope that makes sense.

>

> Regards,

>

> Casler

> TRI-VECTOR 3-D Training Systems

> Century City, CA

>(material deleted)

[Guest guest]

I don't know if much of this debate is more of a semantic debate rather

than a substantial debate, which could be resolved if there was a uniform

nomenclature.

However, I tend to like Casler call for defining loads with the time

and duration associated with them. Even more I like the last reply by Jerry

, because it calls into play gravity and inertia. By associating a

load with time and duration Casler implicitly associates a load with

the speed of execution which is of paramount importance in defining the

training goal. By calling into play gravity and inertia Jerry

highlights the fact that a 20 pound barbell moved upward slowly is only 20

punds, but it would be 40 pounds if moved upward at an acceleration of 9.8

m/s. Most exercise professionals overlook or misunderstand this.

Giovanni Ciriani - West Hartford, CT - USA

On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Jerry <jwats8888@...> wrote:

> **

>

>

> ,

> Thank you for sharing, but with all due respect, the statement you made

> only adds TO the confusion in the exercise industry and are highly

> debateable and in some cases, completely wrong. Call it whatever you want

> i.e. pilates, hiking, Cycling, Rowing, cooking dinner, massage, carrying

> grocieries, yoga, resistance, cardio, endurance, etc etc etc. The stimulus

> is ALWAYS force(M x A). And all of its

> associated components/properties(i.e. gravity, inertia, etc)We live in a

> newtonian world. The human body is a big system of levers(effort,

> resistance, axis). Whether I bend my knee 10 times and call it

> resistance/squat, or bend it for 30 mins and call it

> endurance/cardio/running.....Bending the knee is bending the knee and the

> muscles that are required to work depends on the force and how it is

> transmitted to the body(direction, magnitude, point of application). The

> heart is just a pump. It sends blood to where it is needed.....In this

> case, the

> emphasized(working) muscles. There's nothing magical that comes in and

> challenges the hearts ability to beat with something called " cardio " vs.

> something called " resistance " So, cardio is just as much resistance as

> ....resistance is resistance(It's all force). It's ALL

> resistance(Force). Its simply the adaptations to that stimulus that are

> different. For you to define one or the other on the basis of time or to

> use words like " not really " make these statements opinions and/or

> circumstance, situation, scenario specific at best.

> Lastly, just a few questions:

> -You stated " I think it's important to not confuse the definition and

> concept of " resistance training " , physiologically. " What would resistance

> training non-physiologically be?????

> -how do you define muscular strength(i.e 1 rm, 2 rm, 5 rm 10 rep max, 100

> rep max, 0-2mins?)

> -what wouldn't be CR exercise ??

> -What if it was for 1:59 secs. Is that " resistance " instead of " cardio " ?

> How about 1:55secs? 1:30secs? 4:01secs?

>

>

> Thank you

> Jerry

> Lake , FL

>

>

>

> From: samuel9888 <Sam68123@...>

>

> Supertraining

> Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 8:17 AM

> Subject: Re: Is physical frailty inevitable as we grow

> older?

>

>

>

> I think it's important to not confuse the definition and concept of

> " resistance training " , physiologically. Resistance training is primarily

> designed to increase muscular strength. While it can play a role in

> increasing muscular endurance, rowing and bicycling as described below are

> not really resistance training, i.e. progressive resistance exercise.

> Instead, they are cardiorespiratory (CR) or aerobic exercise by virtue of

> the energy systems used and the duration of the effort.

>

> If I have a person squat or do leg presses with an appropriate load for

> 2-4 minutes straight or longer, presuming the person can keep it up, by

> definition it becomes CR exercise: the aerobic pathways become the primary

> suppliers of energy to the working muscles. When the effort increases--like

> cycling up a mountainside--more muscle fibers that primarily use anaerobic

> pathways will kick in. Eventually you'll come to a new steady state while

> still moving (at whatever speed) or your muscles will force you to stop and

> rest while they catch up on buffering the metabolic acid that builds up.

>

> So while cycling or rowing can offer resistance, they should not be

> considered forms of resistance training.

>

> Merrick, Ph.D.

> Bellevue, NE

> ACSM HFS

> NSCA-CPT/CSCS

>

>

> >

> > I got into rowing to supplement my cycling. Rowing does involve the

> entire body from head to toes. Unfortunately the rowing put great strain on

> my knees and resulted in a torn meniscus. I suspect in part due to poor

> form on my part.

> >

> > I suspect that most of my injuries were self inflicted. I have a

> tendency to push too hard at times.

> >

> > With regards to blood pressure and resistance training you are correct.

> I did a posting on this within the past two years.

> > As with any exercise it is best to start low and go slow.

> > Resistance training, in my opinion, does not have to entail just using

> weights. When I ride my bicycle up the side of a mountain I am doing a lot

> of resistance training on my legs. Rowing can also be considered a form

> resistance training.

> > Ralph Giarnella MD

> > Southington Ct.

> > (material deleted)

>

>

[Guest guest]

In my opinion, at issue here is that there is an assumption that sports, such as

rowing and cycling, do not provide enough resistance to promote increased muscle

strength.  I suspect that proponents of this concept have never trained in

either sport.

************

Theresa wrote:

" While it can play a role in increasing muscular endurance, rowing and

bicycling as described below are  not really resistance training, i.e.

progressive resistance exercise. Instead, they are cardiorespiratory (CR) or

aerobic exercise by virtue of  the energy systems used and the duration of the

effort. "

****************

 There is  too much focus on the cardiorespiratory aspect and down playing the

progressive resistance aspect  of these sports.

Too illustrate my point I would like to give some examples.

I have used a power meter both in cycling and in rowing so I will use the watts

to illustrate my point. 

In simple terms: watts = force x dist/time   

When I began my training I was be able to produce 100 watts of power over a

given period of time.   If that period of time was 1 hr and through training I

was able to extend that same 100 watts of effort to 2 hrs then I will have

improved my endurance. 

If on the other hand if through training I am able to produce 200 watts of power

over 1 hr I would have to have improved my strength (force).In the second

example I can now produce more force over the same time period.  

Endurance only relates to how long I can apply a given force.

 Cardio/vascular/respiratory fitness relates to the physiological changes that

allow me to supply Oxygen, energy and remove CO2 and anions so as to be able to

maintain that force. 

On average  an untrained non athlete riding a bike or rowing indoor rower might

be able to sustain 100 watts for 20-30 minutes.  A well trained cyclist can

sustain 300+  watts for hours and generate  a peak power  of  1400-2000

watts   

Lance Armstrong is reported to be able to generate 400 watts of power for 40+

minutes up a mountain with an 8.5% grade. It takes great strength to be able to

perform that feat and very few in the world can duplicate it.  That he can

repeat it multiple times in a day and on multiple consecutive days (Tour De

France is 22 day race) is due to his training over the years.

As a cyclist (as well as a rower) there are different types of training.  Some

 focus on increasing strength (through progressive resistance, othes on

endurance and still others on improving metabolic changes such as lactate

threshold.

At typical training program is set up based on an individual's lactate threshold

power (LTHP) ( defined in cycling circles as the average power that can be

sustained for 60 minutes) 

In this example for simplicity I will use 100 watts as THP

Endurance training  56-75% of LTHP-         56-75 watt      Tempo

training        76-95% of LTHP          76- 95 watt          

  LT (lactate training) 91-105% of LTHP       91-105 watt

VO2 max training106-129% of LTHP     106-129 watt

Anaerobic training  130-150% of LTHP     130-150 watt

Periodically the athlete  would retest their THP and change the training

intensities accordingly.

Over time a top athlete might have a LTHP of 300 watts or more and the training

intensities would change accordingly. 

There is a progressive increase in intensity (resistance0

Each of these levels of intensities have their own well defined  purposes. 

The gearing on the bicycle allows for progressive increase of resistance.  On

the rowing ergometer the faster you row the greater the wind resistance (the

ergomenter has a enclosed fan- the faster you row the more air it pushes= more

resistance). 

Cycling, rowing running etc do indeed increase strength as well as endurance and

cardio/vascular/respiratory fitness. Let us not forget the metabolic changes

that occur as well. 

I am not trying to imply that endurance training superior to resistance

training, just that it has its merits and one of them is increased muscle

strength An individual may not achieve the same level of strength in cycling or

rowing but the begs the question how much strength is adequate or enough.

  

Over my lifetime I have done both types of training ( weight lifting as well

endurance sports). At present I prefer cycling and kayaking to resistance

training. 

 

Ralph Giarnella MD

Southington Ct. USA 

________________________________

From: Giovanni Ciriani <Giovanni.Ciriani@...>

Supertraining

Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 11:36 AM

Subject: Re: Re: Is physical frailty inevitable as we grow

older?

 

I don't know if much of this debate is more of a semantic debate rather

than a substantial debate, which could be resolved if there was a uniform

nomenclature.

However, I tend to like Casler call for defining loads with the time

and duration associated with them. Even more I like the last reply by Jerry

, because it calls into play gravity and inertia. By associating a

load with time and duration Casler implicitly associates a load with

the speed of execution which is of paramount importance in defining the

training goal. By calling into play gravity and inertia Jerry

highlights the fact that a 20 pound barbell moved upward slowly is only 20

punds, but it would be 40 pounds if moved upward at an acceleration of 9.8

m/s. Most exercise professionals overlook or misunderstand this.

Giovanni Ciriani - West Hartford, CT - USA

On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Jerry <jwats8888@...> wrote:

> **

>

>

> ,

> Thank you for sharing, but with all due respect, the statement you made

> only adds TO the confusion in the exercise industry and are highly

> debateable and in some cases, completely wrong. Call it whatever you want

> i.e. pilates, hiking, Cycling, Rowing, cooking dinner, massage, carrying

> grocieries, yoga, resistance, cardio, endurance, etc etc etc. The stimulus

> is ALWAYS force(M x A). And all of its

> associated components/properties(i.e. gravity, inertia, etc)We live in a

> newtonian world. The human body is a big system of levers(effort,

> resistance, axis). Whether I bend my knee 10 times and call it

> resistance/squat, or bend it for 30 mins and call it

> endurance/cardio/running.....Bending the knee is bending the knee and the

> muscles that are required to work depends on the force and how it is

> transmitted to the body(direction, magnitude, point of application). The

> heart is just a pump. It sends blood to where it is needed.....In this

> case, the

> emphasized(working) muscles. There's nothing magical that comes in and

> challenges the hearts ability to beat with something called " cardio " vs.

> something called " resistance " So, cardio is just as much resistance as

> ....resistance is resistance(It's all force). It's ALL

> resistance(Force). Its simply the adaptations to that stimulus that are

> different. For you to define one or the other on the basis of time or to

> use words like " not really " make these statements opinions and/or

> circumstance, situation, scenario specific at best.

> Lastly, just a few questions:

> -You stated " I think it's important to not confuse the definition and

> concept of " resistance training " , physiologically. " What would resistance

> training non-physiologically be?????

> -how do you define muscular strength(i.e 1 rm, 2 rm, 5 rm 10 rep max, 100

> rep max, 0-2mins?)

> -what wouldn't be CR exercise ??

> -What if it was for 1:59 secs. Is that " resistance " instead of " cardio " ?

> How about 1:55secs? 1:30secs? 4:01secs?

>

>

> Thank you

> Jerry

> Lake , FL

>

>

>

> From: samuel9888 <Sam68123@...>

>

> Supertraining

> Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 8:17 AM

> Subject: Re: Is physical frailty inevitable as we grow

> older?

>

>

>

> I think it's important to not confuse the definition and concept of

> " resistance training " , physiologically. Resistance training is primarily

> designed to increase muscular strength. While it can play a role in

> increasing muscular endurance, rowing and bicycling as described below are

> not really resistance training, i.e. progressive resistance exercise.

> Instead, they are cardiorespiratory (CR) or aerobic exercise by virtue of

> the energy systems used and the duration of the effort.

>

> If I have a person squat or do leg presses with an appropriate load for

> 2-4 minutes straight or longer, presuming the person can keep it up, by

> definition it becomes CR exercise: the aerobic pathways become the primary

> suppliers of energy to the working muscles. When the effort increases--like

> cycling up a mountainside--more muscle fibers that primarily use anaerobic

> pathways will kick in. Eventually you'll come to a new steady state while

> still moving (at whatever speed) or your muscles will force you to stop and

> rest while they catch up on buffering the metabolic acid that builds up.

>

> So while cycling or rowing can offer resistance, they should not be

> considered forms of resistance training.

>

> Merrick, Ph.D.

> Bellevue, NE

> ACSM HFS

> NSCA-CPT/CSCS

>

>

> >

> > I got into rowing to supplement my cycling. Rowing does involve the

> entire body from head to toes. Unfortunately the rowing put great strain on

> my knees and resulted in a torn meniscus. I suspect in part due to poor

> form on my part.

> >

> > I suspect that most of my injuries were self inflicted. I have a

> tendency to push too hard at times.

> >

> > With regards to blood pressure and resistance training you are correct.

> I did a posting on this within the past two years.

> > As with any exercise it is best to start low and go slow.

> > Resistance training, in my opinion, does not have to entail just using

> weights. When I ride my bicycle up the side of a mountain I am doing a lot

> of resistance training on my legs. Rowing can also be considered a form

> resistance training.

> > Ralph Giarnella MD

> > Southington Ct.

> > (material deleted)

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hi ,

I feel like I've painted myself into a corner <LOL>! You are correct that the

term " resistance " is pretty vague and really becomes what someone wants it to

mean at the moment. In fact, I used the term " strength exercise " throughout my

dissertation to focus on that facet of general health/fitness programs.

As for my idea of the pie, my intent was not to tie it to any concept of

" resistance " . It was more to suggest a means of analyzing activities by the

proportions of the three fitness categories they require.

Common definition of our terminology and consistent use of it are continual

challenges we face across different disciplines. I would never call rowing or

mountain biking " resistance " (or even " strength " ) training when dealing with a

client. The body will adapt all its systems according to the imposed demand.

And while a person might experience some increase in muscle size or strength in

performing those activities, they would not be the most effective activities for

achieving those goals (size, strength).

Thank you for the dialog and your perspective! I tend now to think more from

the behavioral/educational perspective than the precise biomechanical/exercise

science one.

Merrick, Ph.D.

Bellevue, NE

>

> Just to clarify, exercise for MS fitness in the position stand includes

strength training and flexibility exercise.

>

> Casler writes:

>

> Muscular Strength application could of course be demonstrated, observed and

measured as the ability to produce muscular force. I understand that the

position is to observe it being applied to an activity. I would tend to

classify flexibility under its own category, since flexibility does not produce

muscular force, any more than it produces endurance.

>

> Such is our " science " . We obviously have significant room for clarification

and edification to our terminology. As stated earlier, I tend to go by specific

primary definitions of terms rather than colloquial or grandfathered definitions

and thus my comments.

>

> Thanks for indulging, enduring and engaging me on the topic.

>

> Regards,

>

> Casler

> TRI-VECTOR 3-D Training Systems

> Century City, CA

[Guest guest]

Ralph Giarnella <ragiarn@...> wrote:

> In my opinion, at issue here is that there is an assumption that

sports, such as rowing and cycling, do not provide enough resistance to

promote increased muscle strength.

Yes, and it's peculiar, considering that the original post in this

thread was about a survey of competitive masters-age swimmers, cyclists

and runners that showed:

" There was little evidence of deterioration in the older athletes'

musculature, however. The athletes in their 70s and 80s had almost as

much thigh muscle mass as the athletes in their 40s, with minor if any

fat infiltration. The athletes also remained strong. There was, as

scientists noted, a drop-off in leg muscle strength around age 60 in

both men and women. They weren't as strong as the 50-year-olds, but the

differential was not huge, and little additional decline followed. The

70- and 80-year-old athletes were about as strong as those in their

60s. "

If one is only interested in avoiding frailty, this study seems to

suggest that running, cycling or swimming is sufficient.

Regards,

sArdmore, PA

[Guest guest]

Interesting conclusion, which I suspect hinges on defining 'frailty'.

The study compares populations participating in similar type strength/endurance

activities, and shows there is a watershed age (identified as around 60) where

the leg strength (and also thigh mass) of these athletes drops, but then remains

at the same at the same level.

Would this same effect be found in absolute strength or speed/strength athletes?

I've seen numerous reports that endurance is the last of the big three

physiological capacities to succumb to age (I believe speed is the first,

followed by absolute strength and then endurance). There are also studies

suggesting muscle fibre 'type' has plasticity and tends to move on the continuum

from power to endurance as we age. Both of these effects suggest that the

strength/endurance (or what we'd likely call the endurance athlete) would indeed

age well.

But the power athlete - maybe not so well. So if I say anyone who can't deadlift

twice their bodyweight is frail, the study might not arrive at the conclusion.

Yes, I know the above sentence is argumentative and isn't really meant

seriously. But I also think the suggestion you can be as strong at 60 as you are

at 40 might not apply if you are defining strength as power. And yes, I know how

strong masters powerlifters and olympic lifters are. None the less, you see a

serious deterioration in world record numbers as the athletes age.

The take-home message to me is that you can combat frailty through a rational

program of balanced activity and I think we all agree on that. I suspect there

are better exercise or lifestyle choices than simply running, cycling or

swimming if the goal is combating frailty due to aging. By this I mean it isn't

enough just to get on a stationary bike and pedal for 30 minutes a day. We've

seen people do this while reading a book and then complain they exercise, but

don't improve.

For example, if cycling is the primary activity I'm sure Ralph would agree that

for overall health it should probably be augmented with assistance exercises,

for upper body musculature, for joint health and range of motion through the

joints, especially the hips and knees. Further, the cycling program should have

a cyclical nature to it, addressing endurance, strength and speed.

I'd say the same about powerlifting or other activities. If the goal is aging

well, than some balance is required. Endurance, strength, speed and range of

motion should all be considered. An athlete can excel at a sport - and not

necessarily be healthy.

Hobman

Saskatoon, Canada

On 11/23/11 8:38 PM, pushprogress wrote:

> Ralph Giarnella <ragiarn@...> wrote:

>

> > In my opinion, at issue here is that there is an assumption that

> sports, such as rowing and cycling, do not provide enough resistance to

> promote increased muscle strength.

>

> Yes, and it's peculiar, considering that the original post in this

> thread was about a survey of competitive masters-age swimmers, cyclists

> and runners that showed:

> " There was little evidence of deterioration in the older athletes'

> musculature, however. The athletes in their 70s and 80s had almost as

> much thigh muscle mass as the athletes in their 40s, with minor if any

> fat infiltration. The athletes also remained strong. There was, as

> scientists noted, a drop-off in leg muscle strength around age 60 in

> both men and women. They weren't as strong as the 50-year-olds, but the

> differential was not huge, and little additional decline followed. The

> 70- and 80-year-old athletes were about as strong as those in their

> 60s. "

> If one is only interested in avoiding frailty, this study seems to

> suggest that running, cycling or swimming is sufficient.

> Regards,

> sArdmore, PA

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hey , the endurance folks aren't beating the elite numbers of the younger

age groups either... .

I mean - Shorter isn't beating his own best times from his heyday either,

right?

Still being an elite athlete as we age does not mean we will do our best lifts

or runs - but it's a far cry from frail!

If you find yourself still beating younger lifters as you age, and you find you

are still considering doing lifetime PR's as you continue through your master

years, you aren't a threat to get frail anytime soon.

As for double bodyweight deadlift as a standard for frailty, goodness...double

mine is over elite on the strength tables lol. You're a hard man to make happy,

. I mean, I strive to maintain that standard but goodness.... and I have

not given up on lifetime PR advancement quite yet...

I'd better lose a couple of kg before I hit 80 to keep this up.

In good humor but pulling for her life!

The Phantom

aka Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter (still in the open as well as

Master at 51..)

Denver, Colorado, USA

Re: Re: Is physical frailty inevitable as we grow

older?

Interesting conclusion, which I suspect hinges on defining 'frailty'.

The study compares populations participating in similar type strength/endurance

activities, and shows there is a watershed age (identified as around 60) where

the leg strength (and also thigh mass) of these athletes drops, but then remains

at the same at the same level.

Would this same effect be found in absolute strength or speed/strength athletes?

I've seen numerous reports that endurance is the last of the big three

physiological capacities to succumb to age (I believe speed is the first,

followed by absolute strength and then endurance). There are also studies

suggesting muscle fibre 'type' has plasticity and tends to move on the continuum

from power to endurance as we age. Both of these effects suggest that the

strength/endurance (or what we'd likely call the endurance athlete) would indeed

age well.

But the power athlete - maybe not so well. So if I say anyone who can't deadlift

twice their bodyweight is frail, the study might not arrive at the conclusion.

Yes, I know the above sentence is argumentative and isn't really meant

seriously. But I also think the suggestion you can be as strong at 60 as you are

at 40 might not apply if you are defining strength as power. And yes, I know how

strong masters powerlifters and olympic lifters are. None the less, you see a

serious deterioration in world record numbers as the athletes age.

The take-home message to me is that you can combat frailty through a rational

program of balanced activity and I think we all agree on that. I suspect there

are better exercise or lifestyle choices than simply running, cycling or

swimming if the goal is combating frailty due to aging. By this I mean it isn't

enough just to get on a stationary bike and pedal for 30 minutes a day. We've

seen people do this while reading a book and then complain they exercise, but

don't improve.

For example, if cycling is the primary activity I'm sure Ralph would agree that

for overall health it should probably be augmented with assistance exercises,

for upper body musculature, for joint health and range of motion through the

joints, especially the hips and knees. Further, the cycling program should have

a cyclical nature to it, addressing endurance, strength and speed.

I'd say the same about powerlifting or other activities. If the goal is aging

well, than some balance is required. Endurance, strength, speed and range of

motion should all be considered. An athlete can excel at a sport - and not

necessarily be healthy.

Hobman

Saskatoon, Canada

On 11/23/11 8:38 PM, pushprogress wrote:

> Ralph Giarnella <ragiarn@...> wrote:

>

> > In my opinion, at issue here is that there is an assumption that

> sports, such as rowing and cycling, do not provide enough resistance to

> promote increased muscle strength.

>

> Yes, and it's peculiar, considering that the original post in this

> thread was about a survey of competitive masters-age swimmers, cyclists

> and runners that showed:

> " There was little evidence of deterioration in the older athletes'

> musculature, however. The athletes in their 70s and 80s had almost as

> much thigh muscle mass as the athletes in their 40s, with minor if any

> fat infiltration. The athletes also remained strong. There was, as

> scientists noted, a drop-off in leg muscle strength around age 60 in

> both men and women. They weren't as strong as the 50-year-olds, but the

> differential was not huge, and little additional decline followed. The

> 70- and 80-year-old athletes were about as strong as those in their

> 60s. "

> If one is only interested in avoiding frailty, this study seems to

> suggest that running, cycling or swimming is sufficient.

> Regards,

> sArdmore, PA

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hobman wrote:

> Interesting conclusion, which I suspect hinges on defining 'frailty'.

For sure, which is why you and I always take statements like that with a grain

of salt

>I suspect there are better exercise or lifestyle choices than

> simply running, cycling or swimming if the goal is

> combating frailty due to aging. By this I mean it isn't enough

> just to get on a stationary bike and pedal for 30 minutes a day.

Agreed. And let's not forget that the subjects of the study were *competitive*

runners, swimmers and cyclists. They were, I'm sure, men and women who did

brutal long and short interval workouts at least once a week. Dr. Giarnella is

right that if a person hasn't trained to the point that he or she could compete

as an endurance athlete, then he can't know how hard that training is. If I

recall correctly, a person who isn't currently training as an endurance athlete

can maintain a power output of maybe 60% of VO2max for 20 minutes. A

competitive endurance athlete can maintain a power output of about 85% of VO2max

and is able to sustain that for an hour or more. A person who hasn't gotten

himself in shape to do a workout like that has no idea how much greater the

suffering is at 85% of VO2max versus 60% of VO2max. (It's not like the level of

discomfort is based on power output as a percentage of lactate threshhold.)

Please understand, I'm not saying that strength and power athletes don't suffer

as much as endurance athletes, but rather, that the other guy's sport always

looks easier. Having deadlifted twice my bodyweight, I understand how much

suffering is involved in doing that, so I understand that I have no idea how

much more is involved in deadlifting, squatting or C & J'ing three times my body

weight. (I weigh 65kg, so the world's best are lifting about three times body

weight for those lifts in my weight bracket.)

That aside, I think the main problem the article is the circular nature of its

argument: did the subjects avoid frailty because of their high-level workouts,

or were they able to continue their high-level workouts because they were

genetically not frail? I think it's some of both, but the latter is a

necessary condition. Not everyone can continue to train at a competitive level

in endurance sports into their 60s and beyond. Runners get knee and hip

problems, swimmers get shoulder problems, cyclists get back, neck and wrist

problems, just for instance.

Regards,

s

Ardmore, PA

[Guest guest]

I'm sorry that I got into this discussion a bit late. I haven't had the time to

review the entire group of emails. But, here is my two cents. In my opinion,

strength training...moving weight is what prevents frailty as we age. Not that I

would discount cycling or running, because there needs to be a mix of training.

But, when there is a discussion of aging and frailty strength training is the

best choice. Stress on the bones and muscle fiber will do more than cycling 50

kilometers. I have enough clients who are middle age women who looked frail, but

now look more sturdy on their feet, are stronger and have maintained their bone

density issues by moving weight. Is the weight heavy? It is to them. Did they

ever exercise prior to working with me? Mostly not. If they did maybe light

jogging.

 

We've all seen masters at bodybuilding shows, powerlifting meets, OL meets and

certain track and field athletes who strength train. They seem to retain muscle

mass (better than their aerobic counterparts) as they age. I just think that

load bearing is better to continue or even begin to fight the frailty issue.

 

Happy Thanksgiving!

Extreme Conditioning Personal Training

Mark Cotton, B.A., PICP, USAW, ISSA

(732) 979-7201

www.extremeconditioning.com

This Electronic Message contains information from Mark Cotton and Extreme

Conditioning Personal Training,LLC, and is privileged. This e-mail (including

any attachments) is intended only for the exclusive use of the individual to

whom it is addressed. The information contained hereinafter is proprietary,

confidential, privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the

reader of this e-mail is not the intended recipient or agent responsible for

delivering the message to the intended recipient, the reader is hereby put on

notice that any use, dissemination, distribution or copying is strictly

prohibited.

From: pushprogress <pushprogress@...>

>Supertraining

>Sent: Saturday, November 26, 2011 8:45 AM

>Subject: Re: Is physical frailty inevitable as we grow older?

>

>

> 

> Hobman wrote:

>

>> Interesting conclusion, which I suspect hinges on defining 'frailty'.

>

>For sure, which is why you and I always take statements like that with a grain

of salt

>

>>I suspect there are better exercise or lifestyle choices than

>> simply running, cycling or swimming if the goal is

>> combating frailty due to aging. By this I mean it isn't enough

>> just to get on a stationary bike and pedal for 30 minutes a day.

>

>Agreed. And let's not forget that the subjects of the study were *competitive*

runners, swimmers and cyclists. They were, I'm sure, men and women who did

brutal long and short interval workouts at least once a week. Dr. Giarnella is

right that if a person hasn't trained to the point that he or she could compete

as an endurance athlete, then he can't know how hard that training is. If I

recall correctly, a person who isn't currently training as an endurance athlete

can maintain a power output of maybe 60% of VO2max for 20 minutes. A competitive

endurance athlete can maintain a power output of about 85% of VO2max and is able

to sustain that for an hour or more. A person who hasn't gotten himself in shape

to do a workout like that has no idea how much greater the suffering is at 85%

of VO2max versus 60% of VO2max. (It's not like the level of discomfort is based

on power output as a percentage of lactate threshhold.)

>

>Please understand, I'm not saying that strength and power athletes don't suffer

as much as endurance athletes, but rather, that the other guy's sport always

looks easier. Having deadlifted twice my bodyweight, I understand how much

suffering is involved in doing that, so I understand that I have no idea how

much more is involved in deadlifting, squatting or C & J'ing three times my body

weight. (I weigh 65kg, so the world's best are lifting about three times body

weight for those lifts in my weight bracket.)

>

>That aside, I think the main problem the article is the circular nature of its

argument: did the subjects avoid frailty because of their high-level workouts,

or were they able to continue their high-level workouts because they were

genetically not frail? I think it's some of both, but the latter is a necessary

condition. Not everyone can continue to train at a competitive level in

endurance sports into their 60s and beyond. Runners get knee and hip problems,

swimmers get shoulder problems, cyclists get back, neck and wrist problems, just

for instance.

>

>Regards,

>

> s

>Ardmore, PA

>

>

>

>

>