• FreeTrainers.com Forums
• Experienced Exercise
• muscle building myths

Group: Experienced Exercise

muscle building myths

daveharris Posts: 20 Joined: 2004/10/26	2005/04/12, 05:42 PM This was on msn today: MYTH #1 Lifting incredibly slowly builds incredibly big muscles. Lifting super slowly produces superlong workouts—and that's it. University of Alabama researchers recently studied two groups of lifters doing a 29-minute workout. One group performed exercises using a 5-second up phase and a 10-second down phase, the other a more traditional approach of 1 second up and 1 second down. The faster group burned 71 percent more calories and lifted 250 percent more weight than the superslow lifters. The real expert says: "The best increases in strength are achieved by doing the up phase as rapidly as possible," says Gary Hunter, Ph.D., C.S.C.S., the lead study author. "Lower the weight more slowly and under control." There's greater potential for growth during the lowering phase, and when you lower with control, there's less chance of injury. MYTH #2 If you eat more protein, you'll build more muscle. To a point, sure. But put down the shake for a sec. Protein promotes the muscle-building process, called protein synthesis, "but you don't need exorbitant amounts to do this," says John Ivy, Ph.D., coauthor of Nutrient Timing. If you're working out hard, consuming more than 0.9 to 1.25 grams of protein per pound of body weight is a waste. Excess protein breaks down into amino acids and nitrogen, which are either excreted or converted into carbohydrates and stored. The real expert says: More important is when you consume protein, and that you have the right balance of carbohydrates with it. Have a postworkout shake of three parts carbohydrates and one part protein. Eat a meal several hours later, and then reverse that ratio in your snack after another few hours, says Ivy. "This will keep protein synthesis going by maintaining high amino acid concentrations in the blood." MYTH #3 Leg extensions are safer for your knees than squats. And cotton swabs are dangerous when you push them too far into your ears. It's a matter of knowing what you're doing. A recent study in Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise found that "open-chain" exercises—those in which a single joint is activated, such as the leg extension—are potentially more dangerous than closed-chain moves—those that engage multiple joints, such as the squat and the leg press. The study found that leg extensions activate your quadriceps muscles slightly independently of each other, and just a 5-millisecond difference in activation causes uneven compression between the patella (kneecap) and thighbone, says Anki Stensdotter, the lead study author. The real expert says: "The knee joint is controlled by the quadriceps and the hamstrings. Balanced muscle activity keeps the patella in place and appears to be more easily attained in closed-chain exercises," says Stensdotter. To squat safely, hold your back as upright as possible and lower your body until your thighs are parallel to the floor (or at least as far as you can go without discomfort in your knees). Try front squats if you find yourself leaning forward. Although it's a more advanced move, the weight rests on the fronts of your shoulders, helping to keep your back upright, Stensdotter says. MYTH #4 Never exercise a sore muscle. Before you skip that workout, determine how sore you really are. "If your muscle is sore to the touch or the soreness limits your range of motion, it's best that you give the muscle at least another day of rest," says Alan Mikesky, Ph.D., director of the human performance and biomechanics laboratory at Indiana University-Purdue University at Indianapolis. In less severe instances, an "active rest" involving light aerobic activity and stretching, and even light lifting, can help alleviate some of the soreness. "Light activity stimulates bloodflow through the muscles, which removes waste products to help in the repair process," says David Docherty, Ph.D., a professor of exercise science at the University of Victoria in Canada. The real expert says: If you're not sore to the touch and you have your full range of motion, go to the gym. Start with 10 minutes of cycling, then exercise the achy muscle by performing no more than three sets of 10 to 15 repetitions using a weight that's no heavier than 30 percent of your one-rep maximum, says Docherty. MYTH #5 Stretching prevents injuries. Maybe if you're a figure skater. Researchers at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reviewed more than 350 studies and articles examining the relationship between stretching and injuries and concluded that stretching during a warmup has little effect on injury prevention. "Stretching increases flexibility, but most injuries occur within the normal range of motion," says Julie Gilchrist, M.D., one of the study's researchers. "Stretching and warming up have just gone together for decades. It's simply what's done, and it hasn't been approached through rigorous science." The real expert says: Warming up is what prevents injury, by slowly increasing your bloodflow and giving your muscles a chance to prepare for the upcoming activity. To this end, Dr. Gilchrist suggests a thorough warmup, as well as conditioning for your particular sport. Of course, flexibility is a good thing. If you need to increase yours so it's in the normal range (touching your toes without bending your knees, for instance), do your stretching when your muscles are already warm. MYTH #6 You need a Swiss ball to build a stronger chest and shoulders. Don't abandon your trusty bench for exercises like the chest press and shoulder press if your goal is strength and size. "The reason people are using the ball and getting gains is because they're weak as kittens to begin with," says Craig Ballantyne, C.S.C.S. You have to reduce the weight in order to press on a Swiss ball, and this means you get less out of the exercise, he says. The real expert says: A Swiss ball is great for variety, but center your chest and shoulder routines on exercises that are performed on a stable surface, Ballantyne says. Then use the ball to work your abs. MYTH #7 Always work out with free weights. Sometimes machines can build muscle better—for instance, when you need to isolate specific muscles after an injury, or when you're too inexperienced to perform a free-weight exercise. If you can't complete a pullup, you won't build your back muscles. So do lat pulldowns to develop strength in this range of motion, says Greg Haff, Ph.D., director of the strength research laboratory at Midwestern State University in Wichita Falls, Texas. The real expert says: "Initially, novice athletes will see benefits with either machines or free weights, but as you become more trained, free weights should make up the major portion of your training program," says Haff. Free-weight exercises mimic athletic moves and generally activate more muscle mass. If you're a seasoned lifter, free weights are your best tools to build strength or burn fat.
iRnLady Posts: 89 Joined: 2004/11/17	2005/04/12, 05:59 PM Great post!!!
	2005/04/12, 08:10 PM nice post....
maniac74 Posts: 39 Joined: 2005/04/30	2005/05/06, 06:05 PM awesome
SkinnyM6886 Posts: 143 Joined: 2004/10/25	2005/05/07, 12:46 PM This post would be good under the beginner section also.
wrestler125 Posts: 4,619 Joined: 2004/01/27	2005/05/08, 08:24 PM I vote on making sticky with members posting other muscle building myths.
sstump1 Posts: 1,227 Joined: 2005/03/20	2005/05/10, 09:35 AM Good information Dave! Here's another myth I think a lot of people believe. "Sitting on the couch watching TV and curling 12 oz cans won't get you a six pack." Trust me I tried that for years...now I'm in my cutting phase. :laugh::laugh:
bigandrew Posts: 5,146 Joined: 2002/10/21	2005/05/16, 08:00 PM myth 3 though.....I think anyone/everyone can go parallel, I mean sersiouly if you can lower your ass into a chair.....you can squat parellal....all the time.....NOT just "as far as you can go" -------------- " The only true eye, is your minds eye"- plato
dvelswk Posts: 192 Joined: 2005/05/07	2005/05/22, 07:44 PM Lol I agree with andrew. Great post.
LifterB Posts: 1 Joined: 2005/06/01	2005/06/01, 01:41 AM That's very insightful!:)
PoolMaster1990 Posts: 164 Joined: 2005/06/09	2005/06/11, 09:14 PM wow very impressive:) -------------- ~If A equals success, then the formula is: A = X + Y + Z, X is work. Y is play. Z is keep your mouth shut.
Turles Posts: 7 Joined: 2005/08/03	2005/08/03, 01:21 AM :)good post
kwmccray Posts: 8 Joined: 2005/11/30	2005/12/21, 02:32 AM Thanks for the tips!:cool:
	2006/01/29, 06:01 AM Here're some more training myths that Eric Cressey a very respected S&C coach points out... Myth #1: You can train the "medial deltoids." I always get a kick out of it when some of the most brilliant strength coaches (I can think of at least five) write about training the medial head of the deltoids with lateral raises or some other shoulder-specific exercise. These are some brilliant guys, so I never have the heart to speak up and tell them that "medial deltoids" don't even exist. Incorporating exercises for this imaginary head is not only impossible, but attempting to do so represents a fundamental lack of knowledge of anatomy. The term "medial" is a directional term that means "toward the midline" of, in this case, the body. From the anatomical position - standing, arms at sides, palms supinated (facing forward), the head of the deltoid that is sandwiched between the anterior and posterior deltoid fibers is actually the farthest away from the midline of the body of all of the heads of the deltoid. If anything, it should be called the lateral head! As such, these fibers are referred to as the "middle deltoid," a term that correctly identifies their position between the anterior and posterior deltoid. Myth #2: You can work on your left and right "bicep" and "tricep." These muscles both have more than one head, so you'd be better off saying, "You can work on your left and right biceps and triceps." Now that we've got the terminology down in a broad sense, let's look at the specific anatomy and how one can prioritize certain heads over the others. An important principle of which you should be aware is active insufficiency, a scenario that occurs when a two-joint muscle cannot contribute optimally to concentric action (i.e. shortening) at one joint because it is already shortened at another. In the case at hand, the long head of both the biceps and triceps can be preferentially recruited or excluded (for the most part) by avoiding or encouraging active insufficiency, respectively. The long (lateral) head of the biceps crosses both the elbow and shoulder joint (and the radio-ulnar joint to act as a supinator, but we won't worry about that right now), acting as an elbow and shoulder flexor. To maximally recruit the long head of the biceps, we need to eliminate one of these joint actions. As such, our options are to a) maintain shoulder extension (preferably past neutral) while flexing the elbow joint (e.g. incline curls) and b) flex the shoulder joint while maintaining elbow extension (e.g. front raise). Both scenarios avoid active insufficiency and force the long head of the biceps to bear the brunt of the load. Likewise, if we want to focus our efforts on the short (medial) head of the biceps, we simply flex the elbow with the shoulder flexed (e.g. preacher curls); because the long head of the biceps is already shortened at the shoulder, it can't contribute effectively to elbow flexion. The long head of the triceps also crosses the shoulder and elbow, but it acts in extension at both joints. If you want to overload this head of the triceps, you can a) maintain shoulder flexion while extending the elbow (e.g. overhead or lying extensions) and b) maintain elbow flexion while extending the shoulder (e.g. bent-arm pullover), although the latter option tends to recruit the lats and teres major more extensively. To reduce involvement of the long head of the triceps in favor of overloading the medial and lateral heads, simply extend the elbow with the shoulder extended (e.g. variations of pressdowns and dips). Myth #3: The traps are just the muscles between your shoulders and neck; they can be trained with just shrugs. This is an unfortunate misconception that has led to countless shoulder injuries in anatomy-ignorant lifters. The trapezius is actually a very large muscle that essentially spans from the lumbar spine all the way to the base of the skull. It can be divided into the lower, middle, and upper fibers; each of the three divisions has unique functions, so it's almost easiest to think of them as separate muscles altogether (much like the different heads of the deltoid). The lower fibers are responsible for scapular depression, retraction, and upward rotation. The middle fibers contribute to scapular retraction, elevation, and upward rotation. Finally, the upper fibers contribute to scapular elevation retraction, and upward rotation, and extension, lateral flexion, and contralateral rotation of the neck. Interestingly, as you may have inferred, the different fibers of the trapezius can act as both antagonists (elevation and depression) and synergists (retraction and upward rotation) to each other! Perhaps more importantly, you hopefully can tell that shrugs only directly train scapular elevation and the upper traps, so you need to use a wider variety of exercises to achieve complete trapezius development. If you didn't pick up on that, you're hopeless; go play in traffic. The rest of you should note that the lower and middle trapezius both play crucial roles in maintaining scapular stability and proper posture, two factors with definite implications in terms of overall shoulder health. Myth #4: Close-grip bench presses are good for the "inner" chest. I've read a lot of anatomy books, but I've never come across the inner head of the pectoralis major. There are clavicular (upper) and sternal (lower) fibers, but selective recruitment of these fibers is a function of angle of inclination of the bench and different movement patterns rather than grip width. Bringing your grip closer together will recruit more triceps, though. Myth #5: Your body doesn't know the differences between similar exercises that target similar musculature. I have been surprised to see this coming from a few prominent writers in the bodybuilding and strength and conditioning industries, so I thought this article would be a good place to air my disagreement with such a statement. Essentially (and pardon the stereotype), this is bodybuilding logic. For the most part, in the bodybuilding world, there are only muscles; in the quest to be big, and not strong or proficient at some athletic endeavor, many bodybuilders completely overlook the role of the nervous system in exercise selection. Let's start with the most basic arguments against this logic. As Mel Siff points out, "Subtle differences apparently as insignificant as a change in grip, stance or head position in regular training can cause significant neural changes which control the way in which the athlete executes a given skill (1)." When we change our grip on standing dumbbell curl variations, for instance, we can shift the emphasis within the elbow flexors among the biceps brachii, brachioradialis, and brachioradialis (among other muscles). Like I said, we're starting with the basics, but let's now make our example a bit more complex by comparing a preacher curl and a standing dumbbell curl. As I mentioned before, there are obvious muscular recruitment changes that occur due to the aforementioned active insufficiency of the long head of the biceps with the flexed-humerus position. Likewise, there are implications in terms of force production capabilities. According to Siff, Many studies indicate that, in all of the diverse isolated single-joint movements, changes in strength apparently depend upon the role and functions of the joint mechanisms and the relative disposition of the body's links relative to one another. Changes in joint angle alter the conditions of muscular work, since muscle length and angle of pull are changed. Muscular strength and leverage change, and consequently, so does the torque (i.e. moment of force) produced by the muscles about a joint (1). Keep in mind that the above quote only refers to single-joint movement; as I'm sure you can imagine, when multiple joints are involved, recruitment patterns can differ even more dramatically. Because joint angle affects how muscles produce force, there are clear implications in terms of the overall training effect. For instance, at joint orientations, rate of force development (RFD) will be faster than at others; when dealing with athletes, this is an important consideration. Moreover, strength increases over the entire range of motion depend to a large degree on the joint angle in training at which maximum muscular tension is attained (1). If this strongest position is avoided (via partial reps, for example), the magnitude of the strength increases may be compromised. Now, let's go back to the preacher curl versus standing dumbbell curl example. Not only are recruitment patterns different within the elbow flexor musculature, but contributions (or lack thereof) from the rest of the kinetic chain are also altered. Far more stabilization must take place at multiple joints in the latter exercise because of the standing position and the lack of support for the upper arms. This underscores the importance of basing all training programs on core exercises; they simply involve more musculature and train recruitment patterns that are functional for our daily lives. It also demonstrates the differential training effect of, say, a floor press when compared to a 2-board press. Both have their place in training programs, but the latter involves greater muscle recruitment and loading in a fixed distance traveled by the bar. Now, let's take this a step further. Which is more neurally draining: a 1RM barbell curl or a 1RM deadlift? If you answered "the curl," it's time to start taking your lower body training more seriously. Very simply, the deadlift is more taxing because it requires more work (force times distance) to be done. Increasing both the force and distance components necessitate increased muscular recruitment via increased neural output. One step further: is a full ROM 1RM barbell curl more neurally draining than a ½ curl? Assuming the same weight it utilized, of course (force stays the same, but distance is greater). However, let's assume you can use enough additional weight on the ½ curl to offset the reduction in distance, and the overall work is the same for both exercises. Then, you certainly have a conundrum. In a broad sense, the neural demands are similar; however, differences exist in terms of rate coding and fiber recruitment, depending again on joint orientation. Here's where a lot of folks want to end the discussion (if they're even gotten this far without getting bored or confused). If we've established that subtle variations in exercises won't markedly change the overall impression left on the nervous system, then we can go ahead and bench 52 weeks per year as long as we change our rep ranges and tempo of execution, right? Yes, but since when is lifting weights about "avoiding stagnation," and not about "getting hella beeeg, fast, and strong?" That's right; I'm talking about optimization of training here. Read on… Training has a far more profound impact on the nervous system than just fiber recruitment. Most attention in the literature is focused on the efferent (motor) and not the afferent (sensory, or feedback) component on the nervous system. However, varying exercise selection – just like varying speed of execution, loading, and volume – is crucial to developing afferent pathways as well. Specifically, I'm referring to the joint receptors. Pascinian corpuscles are rapidly adapting receptors that are highly sensitive to vibration frequency, acceleration, and deceleration. Golgi-Mazzoni corpuscles are sensitive to compression of the joint capsule, therefore supplying crucial information to the CNS regarding how close one is to the end of the range of motion. Ruffini endings are sensitive to capsular stretching with respect to speed and direction; this information complements that gathered by the Pascinian corpuscles. Golgi ligament endings are sensitive to tension and stretch on ligaments, whereas free nerve endings (nociceptive and nonnociceptive) may respond to a variety of mechanical and biochemical stimuli (2,3). The CNS cannot act without information upon which to base its actions, so efficiency of these joint receptors is of paramount importance in determining not only success, but injury prevention (e.g. knowing when to fire a muscle to decelerate a movement). For this reason, re-education of joint receptors should be an important focus in all rehabilitation and prehabilitation programs. The best way to train these receptors is to expose them to a wide variety of speeds, loads, and positions. from http://www.ruggedmag.com/index.php?type=Article&i=11&a=3 Myth #6: Stance width dictates recruitment of the different muscles of the quadriceps during squats and leg presses. Contrary to what the local self-proclaimed bodybuilding guru might have told you, this is false. Recruitment is more a function of squat depth than width. McCaw and Melrose (1999) demonstrated that although a wider stance will recruit more of the adductors and glutes, it doesn't change the relative contributions of the four muscles of the quadriceps during a squat (1). In other words, the "feet together for the vastus lateralis" and "wide stance for the vastus medialis" concepts simply don't hold water. The vastus medialis is better recruited with terminal knee extension and any movements that send the knee into valgus. Likewise, anecdotally, knee extension exercises from positions of great knee flexion (e.g. deep squats, lunges, and step-ups) preferentially recruit the vastus medialis. This could result from increased activity of the adductor magnus - which also works as a hip extensor – to assist in hip extension from the low position. Research has shown that because the vastus medialis oblique originates on the adductor magnus tendon, increasing adductor magnus activity will enhance vastus medialis recruitment. This is the premise behind many physical therapists recommending straight leg raises with the knee extended and femur adducted to strengthen the vastus medialis; unfortunately, this rehabilitation model isn't functional at all, and therefore doesn't have much value beyond the initial stages of rehabilitation. The next time someone tells you that stance width is what determines quadriceps recruitment, ask him how we classify single leg movements, where there is no such thing as stance width! Myth #7: The "core" consists of just the abs, and can best be trained with crunches. This statement is accepted as gospel in most mainstream muscle magazines, but it's actually way off the mark. The core actually encompasses far more musculature than the rectus abdominus alone; broadly speaking, it extends from the upper torso and neck to the knees, serving as the link between strength and power in the lower and upper body. Clark (2001) put forth perhaps the best functional anatomy breakdown of the core when he divided it into the local (deep) and global (superficial, prominent) musculature (2). The local musculature – including most notably the transverse abdominus and multifidus – functions primarily to stabilize the spine. Much debate has arisen in the strength training and rehabilitation communities in regards to whether or not the local musculature warrants direct training in healthy individuals. Since it's my article, I'm allowed to give my opinion: in healthy individuals, spinal stabilization occurs involuntarily, so direct training is unproductive, and potentially counterproductive, as McGill has pointed out (3). I'd also like to take this opportunity to say that I think it sucks that most canned tuna has soy hidden in it. Oh yeah, this is also a good spot for my prediction of a third Patriots Super Bowl win in four years. Clark further divided the global musculature into the lateral, deep longitudinal, posterior oblique, and anterior oblique "subsystems." All of these subsystems function as a cohesive unit during complex movements (2), but they warrant mention individually to understand how training can be targeted for improving function in one or more. The lateral subsystem involves the interaction of the gluteus maximus, tensor fascia latae, adductors, and quadratus lumborum (think "inner and outer thighs and hips"). This subsystem plays an important role in stabilizing the body in the frontal plane during activities (especially single-leg work) involving the lower body (2). The deep longitudinal subsystem most notably includes the erector spinae, biceps femoris, sacrotuberous ligament, and thoracolumbar fascia; this system is a crucial component of the powerful posterior chain that you've likely heard discussed by numerous strength coaches. Essentially, this subsystem's primary function is to allow forces generated in the lower body to be carried up to the upper body (and vice versa, in less common occurrences) (2). The posterior oblique subsystem also includes the gluteus maximus and thoracolumbar fascia, but this time in collaboration with the contralateral latissimus dorsi (2). You may have heard of the "serape effect," which relates the gluteus maximus and latissimus dorsi during the gait cycle. Basically, both muscles are extensors; when the right arm is extending (thanks to the right lat) during gait, so is the left leg (thanks in part to the left gluteus maximus). By "posterior oblique," we're referring to the back and across nature of this muscular interaction. This subsystem also has implications in transverse plane stability (2). The anterior oblique subsystem consists of the adductors, internal and external obliques, and external rotators of the hips: gluteus maximus, piriformis, obturator internus and externus, gemelli superior and inferior, quadratus femoris, long head of biceps femoris, posterior fibers of the gluteus medius, sartorius, and adductor complex (at certain degrees of hip flexion). Beyond its obvious role in producing rotational motion, this final system is an important part of transverse plane stabilization (2). Myth #8: You can "isolate" muscles in a resistance training context. True muscular isolation is only possible in fine movements like blinking and twitching. In more gross movements and those involving significant external loading, numerous muscles interact as prime movers, synergists, and stabilizers. While some single-joint exercises will allow you to focus more on one muscle than others in concentric, eccentric, and isometric actions, it's simply impossible to truly isolate a muscle. In fact, the concept of isolated muscle action actually has dangerous implications, as elimination of important stabilizers would undoubtedly compromise exercise safety. If you don't believe me when I say that true isolation is impossible, you can continue to try to isolate your medial gastrocnemius while your bandana-sporting, belt wearing, pretty boy training partner screams in your ear about how badass you are. Meanwhile, those of us who know better will just keep to ourselves and do multi-joint exercises that allow for significant external loading, and we'll see who makes better progress. Myth #9: The secret to healthy shoulders is to have a big, strong chest, lats, delts, and "traps." I've heard this one on several occasions, and it never ceases to crack me up. These larger muscles are usually the problems, not the solutions! When you hammer your pecs, lats, anterior delts, and upper traps mercilessly and ignore their antagonists (external rotators, horizontal abductors, scapular retractors, and scapular depressors), unfavorable postures and movement patterns develop. Specifically, the humeri tend to assume an internally rotated resting position and the scapulae become elevated, winged and anteriorly tilted. These changes mechanically decrease the already-narrow subacromial space, increasing the likelihood that the tendons of the rotator cuff will become irritated when the arm is raised. When the rotator cuff is strong, it serves to depress the humeral head in the glenoid fossa so that this impingement doesn't occur. If the SITS muscles (supraspinatus, infraspinatus, subscapularis, and teres minor) are weak relative to these larger muscles, the humeral head translates superiorly excessively; the pain is most prominent in bench pressing and overhead movements. Summarily, the secret to healthy shoulders is to train the antagonists to the "big dogs" in order to foster appropriate strength ratios and maintain ideal resting posture. Myth #10: Calves won't grow without calf raises. In my experience, calf development is perhaps the single-most genetically influenced aspect of weight training. Some guys are born with high calves, and some have thick ankles attached to tree trunks. That's not to say, however, that training and lifestyle factors can't markedly improve the size of one's calves. Yes, I said lifestyle factors! Take a look at any really fat person, and you'll see a great set of calves. The soleus comprises roughly 2/3 of the lower leg musculature, and since it's largely a postural muscle, it tends to hypertrophy in tubby people even if they don't exercise. It may not seem fair to those of you who are putting in the time with hours upon hours of calf raises, but that's life. Speaking of calf raises, they aren't the only way to train calves. The gastrocnemius works not only in plantarflexion, but also in knee flexion. As such, it gets hit hard with glute-ham raises and leg curls. Moreover, plantarflexion is trained heavily in a variety of more compound movements, including Olympic lifts, sprinting, sled dragging, and farmer's walks (with accentuated pushoffs). Sometimes, ignoring the calf raises altogether and focusing on these compound movements is a great way to spark growth "by accident." Or, they can serve as valuable adjuncts to your regimen of seated, standing, leg press, and donkey calf raises. Finally, the tibialis anterior (muscle on the front of the shin) can contribute to lower leg mass; dorsiflexion exercises and downhill running can be effective means of improving in this regard. from http://www.ruggedmag.com/index.php?type=Article&i=12&a=6 I highly recommend checking out that whole site....it got great articles on training and nutrition.
wrestler125 Posts: 4,619 Joined: 2004/01/27	2006/01/29, 12:06 PM Excellent post menace. While we're on the subject of EC and muscle myths... Debunking Exercise Myths, Part I by Eric Cressey We live in a society that doesn't want gray areas. People want right or wrong, up or down, and left or right. This mindset carries over to the gym, too; lifters want to be able to say that Exercise A is evil, and Exercise B is safe. Unfortunately, it's not that simple, so with that in mind, I'm devoting this article to killing off some myths, establishing some more well-defined gray areas, and making recommendations on who can do what. I'm going to come right out and say it: in the absence of musculoskeletal pathology, no movement is fundamentally bad. Sure, there are exercises like kickbacks and leg extensions that don't give you as much bang for your buck as their multi-joint counterparts (e.g. dips and squats), but that's not to say that these pansy exercises are "bad" for you. Likewise, it's rare that I write any sort of machine lift into my programming, but there are rehabilitation patients that benefit greatly from certain machine training. In my opinion, there are only five scenarios in which exercise is ever truly bad for you from a health standpoint: 1. When that exercise is performed in excessive volume. 2. When that exercise is performed with poor technique. 3. When that exercise is performed in a manner that puts it out of balance with the rest of the programming that is in place. 4. When that exercise irritates an existing injury or condition. 5. When that exercise is performed with excessive loading (relative to the lifter's capabilities). Now, it's not feasible for me to outline every specific instance where every exercise is safe or unsafe, but I can address some common adages we frequently hear in our gyms. Adage #1: Your knees shouldn't pass your toes when you squat. First off, you need to consider whether you're a powerlifter or a bodybuilder. In other words, are you planning on hammering your posterior chain by using predominantly the hamstrings, glutes and lumbar erectors to complete the movement? Or, are you looking to overload the quads? It goes without saying that the movements are significantly different, so it's important to first differentiate between the two. In the powerlifting squat, you'll be sitting back, arching hard, and attempting to keep the shins perpendicular to the floor; in other words, there will be more trunk flexion, thus facilitating recruitment of the hip extensors and enabling you to get to parallel easier. While the knee extensors are going to be involved to some extent (as there is knee flexion occurring on the eccentric), it's the muscles acting at the hip that account for the majority of the force that brings you out of the hole. It is, however, virtually impossible to squat rock bottom with a powerlifting style squat; your chest would be on top of your thighs far before your hamstrings hit your calves (unless you have freaky big hamstrings and calves). In the Olympic version of the squat, initiating the movement is still about sitting back, but not nearly to the same degree as the former example. Essentially, we're looking for a happy medium between sitting back and sitting down. The knees are going to come in front of the toes simply because this is the only way to get deep when the trunk is more upright; if the knees stay directly above the toes on an Olympic squat, your base of support is too narrow, your center of gravity is shifted backward, and you fall backward (and still don't get your depth). You see this all the time in beginners. It's almost as pathetic as when they talk on their cell phones in the gym. So, the question arises of whether or not the knees coming in front of the toes during the Olympic squat is dangerous. Fry, Smith, and Schilling (2003) examined joint kinetics during back squats under two conditions.(1) In the first condition, a board placed in front of the participants' shins restricted the forward displacement of the knees. In the second condition, movement wasn't restricted at all; they squatted normally, and the knees passed the toes (gasp!). The researchers found that restricting the forward excursion of the knees during the squat increased anterior lean of the trunk and promoted an increased "internal angle at the knees and ankles." The results were a 22% decrease in knee torque and a 1070% increase in hip torque! Sure, they "saved" the knees by limiting stress on them, but those forces were transferred more than tenfold to the hips and lower back! The researchers concluded that "appropriate joint loading during this exercise may require the knees to move slightly past the toes". "May?" Ugh. I mean honestly; look at these photos that the authors included. Isn't the lumbo-pelvic position in "B" just lovely? Source: Fry and Smith, 2003, J Strength Cond Res. In consideration of this study and photo "B," some might wonder whether powerlifting squats are safe on the hips and lower back. My answer is a resounding "YES" for several reasons. First, powerlifters attempt to minimize, not eliminate, the knees coming in front of the toes. There is always going to be at least subtle anterior excursion of the knees relative to the feet. Second, powerlifters know to sit back and not down when they squat; the participants in this study were still attempting to do the latter when they performed the restricted squats. If you try to Olympic squat with the shins perpendicular to the floor; your lower back is going to round... period. Engaging in this debate would amount to comparing apples and oranges. Third, powerlifters are proficient at establishing and maintaining a tight arch of the lumbar spine; this position is crucial to keeping the chest up and, in turn, the center of gravity within the base of support (or else the movement becomes a good morning). This position also places the hamstrings at a mechanical advantage. Fourth, powerlifters assume a squatting stance that is at least a little wider than that of Olympic lifters; this repositioning "opens up" the hips and enables one to get deeper without considerable forward excursion of the knees. Fifth, photo "B" is not a powerlifting squat; it's just a mess of torso and limbs with a bar on top. Adage #2: You should not squat below parallel. I'm on a roll with the squatting issue, so I might as well stick with it. Let's get something straight right off the bat: the "parallel" designation is something that was not borne out of any biomechanical rationale whatsoever. Rather, it is a product of needing a way to determine if the squat is completed in lifting competition. Where people lost sight of this fact is beyond my comprehension, so I'll simply ask this: would you use partial range of motion on other exercises in a healthy individual without any exercise contraindications? I didn't think so. Although this reasoning ought to be enough for most of you, how about a little literature to back this up? Salem and Powers (2001) looked at patellofemoral joint kinetics in female collegiate athletes at three different depths: 70 degrees (above parallel), 90 degrees (at parallel), and 110 degrees (below parallel) of knee flexion. The researchers found that "Peak knee extensor moment, patellofemoral joint reaction force and patellofemoral joint stress did not vary significantly between the three squatting trials (2);" there was no support for the idea that squatting below parallel increases stress on the patellofemoral joint. It's important to also note that squatting depth should be determined by the athlete's flexibility and goals, as well as the nature of his sport. If one doesn't have the flexibility to get below parallel safely, then the rock-bottom squat shouldn't be part of his arsenal; this athlete's attention would be better devoted elsewhere and possibly supplemented with squats at or above parallel. It stands to reason that different athletes will have different goals in light of the demands of their sports, too. For instance, Olympic lifters and rock climbers would require positions of deep closed-chain knee flexion more often that offensive linemen and marathoners. Then again, the nature of some sports requires that deep squatting be used to offset the imbalances that result from always working the knee extensors in the 1/4 and 1/2 squat positions; this is one reason that cyclists, hockey players, and athletes who do significant amounts of running (e.g. soccer players, marathoners) ought to prioritize deep squatting and single-leg movements early in the off-season. Finally, it's important to remember that while a full range-of-motion squat will offer noticeable carryover to top-end strength, 1/4 squats will not yield strength increases in the lower positions. Effectively, you get more bang for your training buck by squatting deep, which is one reason why this modality is the best option for those purely interested in looking good nekkid. Adage #3: Your toes should point straight-ahead when squatting. "Should" and "Can" are two completely different stories. In order to squat, leg press, or do any other closed-chain movement involving considerable knee flexion, we need a certain amount of dorsiflexion range of motion at our ankles. Unfortunately, as Mike Robertson and I pointed out in our Neanderthal No More series, a large percentage of the population has tight calves and tends to over-pronate at the subtalar joints (leading to flat feet). As a result, dorsiflexion ROM is compromised, and if the lifter tries to squat deep with the toes pointing straight ahead, he must compensate by a) rising up on the toes, b) increasing the amount of hip flexion, or c) combining the two in what makes for an extremely ugly squat. Fortunately, you can alleviate these problems by simply externally rotating the feet (pointing the toes outward); doing so "unlocks" the ankles and gives you the requisite amount of dorsiflexion you'll need to squat. You should still, however, work toward a point where you can squat with the feet pointing nearly straight ahead; this "work" should consist of loosening up the hip flexors and plantarflexors. Adage #4: Good mornings are bad for your back. Generalizations are a very dangerous thing. I think it's fair to say that the ordinary folks who criticize you for doing GMs assume that you're using the exercise to train the lumbar erectors and not the entire posterior chain, specifically the glutes and hamstrings. Essentially, these individuals fail to differentiate between lumbar and pelvic motion. I'll be blunt; rounding the lumbar spine under compressive loads is not a good thing. In the position of full forward flexion, the passive structures (discs, ligaments and thoracolumbar fascia) and NOT the muscles bear the overwhelming majority of the load. This occurrence is referred to as the "flexion relaxation response of the erector spinae."(3,4) This position is bad enough for the ordinary trainee, but even worse for folks with shear instability conditions like spondylolisthesis. In fact, this group of individuals should avoid lumbar flexion exercises such as sit-ups (more on that in Part II) and even reverse hypers, which have received much praise in rehabilitating lower back injuries of different sorts. So what can we do to make good mornings safe? How about a little of modern-day natural selection in a resistance training context where only the strongest survive? Let's say that we have 100 trainees that represent the gym-going population as a whole. Roughly 65 of these individuals will be deconditioned with a complete lack of proficiency in any realm of fitness; we can eliminate them from the good morning pool immediately. For the sake of this argument, based on all the emails I receive and my experience on the T-Nation forums, I'm going to estimate that the majority of our readers are in the "Upper 35" echelon. I'd estimate that 20 of this echelon's trainees, although possessing an average level of general fitness, need to be focusing on other core exercises before moving to those (like good mornings) that sit a little higher-up on the risk continuum. Exercises like deadlifts, squats, various presses, rows, dips and a boatload of prehab work are what they need. Good mornings may come eventually, but they don't need to worry about crossing that road just yet. That's not to say, however, that there aren't steps to be taken in anticipation of crossing that road. Specifically, it's important that they learn the concept of abdominal bracing to optimize spinal stability. As Stuart McGill has vehemently advocated, you should imagine "locking the rib cage to the pelvis."(5) A ton of core work is just what the doctor ordered, in these cases. Serious postural issues and substitution patterns in the lumbo-pelvic area are contraindications to really hitting GMs hard. An accentuated lordotic curve is the most concerning issue on this front; if your lumbar erectors are overactive to compensate for a lack of glute and hamstring contribution, the only way to pre-stretch the "faulty" prime movers and potentiate force generation is lumbar flexion. As I noted above, the flexion relaxation response phenomenon makes this a very bad idea. The remaining 15 are in a position where they can properly execute GMs, -that is, unless they have a significant (either cumulative or single traumatic) history of lower back injuries. If they're part of this at-risk population, I recommend that they stay away from GMs altogether. Last I heard, it's estimated that about 80% of people have some sort of lower back pain during their lives, so this issue obviously carries over to the aforementioned trainee groups, too. I'd estimate that this eliminates another three trainees, 20% of our hardcore crew. We're down to twelve legitimate candidates, eight of whom can safely perform the GMs in 5+ range, but their form goes down the tubes when the weight gets too heavy and they panic. In my experience, form is far more likely to crap out under heavy loading than it is under accumulated fatigue in the last few reps of a set. This leaves us with the Final Four. What can I say? I'm writing this from the college basketball capital of the universe during March Madness, and I went with the mood. These four T-Men are ready for "chaos training" as outlined by Dave Tate here. Brace the core, maintain a neutral spine, and you're good to go. Potvin et al. (1991) asserted that "the risk of injury may be influenced more by the degree of lumbar flexion than the choice of stoop or squat technique."(4) If you only take one thing away from this article, let it be that the spine should not flex under heavy load. So, out of 100 trainees, I estimate that twelve are actually able to handle GMs in their programming, and only four of them can get really hit them heavy. In T-Man terms, it works out to about a third of you doing them, but only one-tenth of you doing them balls-to-the-wall. Then again, even that is going to be dependent on your goals. In consideration of the good morning debate, I'm reminded of something Dr. Jeff Anderson, Director of Sports Medicine at the University of Connecticut, said to me once: "If you live your life the right way, you'll likely find yourself in an orthopedist's office at some point. If you live it the wrong way, you'll likely end up in cardiologist's office instead."(6). Need proof? Granhed and Morelli (1988) found that retired heavyweight lifters demonstrated a markedly greater reduction in disc height on x-rays when compared with age-matched controls.(7) You simply need to find how far toward one end of the spectrum you want to be. If you want to do something incredible, you need to be willing to take risks while maximizing safety. Adage #5: You should wear a belt. This issue has been addressed quite a bit, but for some reason, the message never seems to hit home with people. Perhaps the problem is that a lot of the research cited only investigates the use of belts in workplace safety scenarios and not resistance training contexts. As is the case with a lot of these adages, the decision to use or not use a belt is goal-dependent. First, let's make it clear that you should not be using a belt for anything below 90% of 1RM; for most, this comprises sets of more than three reps. One of the most common misconceptions regarding belt use in a resistance training context is that simply because the belt assists in increasing intra-abdominal pressure (IAP), it must automatically reduce the compressive load on the spine. This is completely false; the belt certainly doesn't have a favorable impact on compressive forces, and may even increase the compressive load! (5) It's readily apparent that wearing a belt has helped many lifters to move heavier weights than they would under "raw" conditions, but the question remains: do they decrease the risk of injury? Well, in consideration of the fact that they restrict the end of the range of motion in lumbar spine flexion, one would have to agree that they do, especially in those who cannot maintain a neutral spine. Interestingly, this is one of the reasons belts can add pounds to your total; they facilitate the elastic response to torso flexion; the more neutral the spine is (as it should be), the less profound this effect is. Oddly enough, as McGill puts it, "to obtain the maximal effect from a belt, the lifter must lift poorly and in a way that exposed the back to a much higher risk of injury."(5) An additional mechanism by which belts increase one's ability to move big weights are via expansion of the base of support to increase torso stiffness when placed under heavy loads. This stiffness helps to prevent the spine from buckling. (As someone with a pretty sound knowledge of biomechanics, I can assure you that buckling is a bad thing.) Belt use and "natural" methods to increase IAP are both effective in enhancing stability, both individually and in tandem.(8) So what's the problem with belt use? It alters firing patterns such that the belt becomes a crutch, and important core musculature is not called upon to stabilize the spine. Considerable evidence exists to suggest that wearing a belt causes individuals to unknowingly alter their motor patterns. Cholewicki et al. (1999) compared belt use and increasing intra-abdominal pressure "naturally" under situations where lumbar spine stability was challenged via a sudden load release (in either trunk flexion, extension, or lateral flexion). The investigators found that belt use caused activity to decrease for the thoracic erector spinae in extension and the lumbar erector spinae in flexion (8). With all this in mind, here are four broad recommendations for belt use: 1. Gym-goers with purely physique benefits in mind have little to no use for belts. 2. Powerlifters and those most interested in optimizing strength should use belts as a means of increasing spinal stability only on their heaviest attempts. A noteworthy exception is when the belt is used to hold other equipment (e.g. squat suit, bench shirt) in place. 3. When used, belts should be coupled with natural methods of increasing IAP. 4. Use belts for winning competitions, not improving core strength. Digest! These five adages should give you something to chew on until Part II, when you'll get some more food for thought! About the Author Eric Cressey, BS, CSCS is currently pursuing a Master's Degree in Kinesiology with a concentration in Exercise Science at the University of Connecticut. A competitive powerlifter, Eric has written over fifty articles for publication in various online and print magazines. He has experience in athletic performance, rehabilitation, human performance laboratory and general conditioning settings. You can contact him at ericcressey@hotmail.com. References 1. Fry AC, Smith JC, Schilling BK. Effect of knee position on hip and knee torques during the barbell squat. J Strength Cond Res. 2003 Nov;17(4):629-33. 2. GJ Salem and CM Powers. Patellofemoral joint kinetics during squatting in collegiate women athletes. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon), June 1, 2001; 16(5): 424-30. 3. McGill SM. The mechanics of torso flexion: situps and standing dynamic flexion manoeuvres. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 1995 Jun;10(4):184-192. 4. Potvin JR, McGill SM, Norman RW. Trunk muscle and lumbar ligament contributions to dynamic lifts with varying degrees of trunk flexion. Spine. 1991 Sep;16(9):1099-107. 5. McGill, S. Ultimate Back Fitness and Performance. Stuart McGill, PhD, 2004. 6. Anderson, J. Personal Communication. November, 2003. 7. Granhed H, Morelli B. Low back pain among retired wrestlers and heavyweight lifters. Am J Sports Med. 1988 Sep-Oct;16(5):530-3. 8. Cholewicki J, Juluru K, Radebold A, Panjabi MM, McGill SM. Lumbar spine stability can be augmented with an abdominal belt and/or increased intra-abdominal pressure. Eur Spine J. 1999;8(5):388-95. © 1998 — 2005 Testosterone, LLC. All Rights Reserved. And Part II.... Debunking Exercise Myths, Part II by Eric Cressey In Part I, our first five adages focused predominantly on the lower body. Now, in Part 2, we’ll look closely at some commonly maligned upper body exercises. Adage #6: Bench pressing will destroy your shoulders. This one makes me want to pull out my hair. The bench press and its variations have tremendous value in training the upper body; problems arise when people train their egos and not the movements. This egotistical bench approach can be summed up with the following: 1. Lack of balance in training volume: This imbalance is present in a) internal and external rotation of the humerus, b) lack of balance between scapular protraction and retraction (and often inappropriate protraction substitution patterns), and c) horizontal adduction and horizontal abduction. The solutions are actually quite simple: bench less; do more horizontal pulling, external rotations and horizontal abduction exercises (i.e. posterior deltoid work); and incorporate some isolated scapular protraction work to activate the serratus anterior (see the Neanderthal No More series for specific exercises). 2. Poor technique: Unless you're a powerlifter in competition, don't get caught up in just using the grip (usually an ultra wide one) that allows you to move the most iron. Instead, you should choose a grip that takes into account shoulder health, recruitment patterns and carryover to sport. In terms of shoulder health, in almost all cases, a narrower grip will be the safest, with anything outside of 1.5 times shoulder-width putting you at markedly greater risk (1,2). From a recruitment pattern standpoint, a close grip will overload the triceps to a greater degree, whereas a wider grip will involve the pectoralis major more. Using a 14-inch grip tends to have the greatest carryover to athletics. Just think of the position from which you block in football, throw a chest pass in basketball, check in hockey, grapple with an opponent in mixed martial arts, or support your body weight while in the missionary position. A comprehensive description of benching technique is beyond the scope of this article, but if I had to give ten cues, they’d be 1) chest high, 2) elbows tucked, 3) scapulae retracted, 4) lower back neutral or arched, 5) feet on floor, 6) tight core (braced), 7) elbows under the bar, 8) get a lift-off, and 9) pull the bar down to you, and 10) spread the bar as you think about pressing yourself away from it (through the bench). Also, in terms of bar speed, a controlled eccentric is much easier on your shoulders than ballistic work (3), so if you have a history of injury, you’d be best off avoiding bench throws and speed benches unless you’re completely in the clear. I cannot overstate the importance of keeping the chest high and elbows tucked, as doing so will prevent hyperextension in the bottom position of the bench press. This hyperextension has been linked to anterior glenohumeral instability related to capsular trauma and too much traction on the acromioclavicular (AC) joint.(4,5) Osteolysis of the distal clavicle can also become a serious problem in those who hyperextend the shoulder in the bottom position of the bench press.(6) 3. Lack of flexibility, or excessive flexibility: On one hand, we have the average gym rat that has benched his way to posture so bad that it would put Quasimoto to shame. With such internally rotated humeri and anteriorly tilted, winging scapulae, the subacromial space (space in the "shoulder" joint) is markedly compromised, and the rotator cuff can be easily irritated with various overhead activities and horizontal pressing. This situation is known as external impingement, and affected individuals need to fix their posture in order to bench safely. On the other hand, you’ll encounter individuals (commonly overhead throwing athletes) with hypermobility at the glenohumeral joint; essentially, there’s too much room in the socket, and the humeral head clanks off of the rotator cuff and eventually leads to rotator cuff damage (internal impingement). These folks may need surgery to tighten things up, although many can work around the injuries and hypermobility with specific rotator cuff and scapular strengthening exercises as well as modification of form on (or completely avoiding) certain exercises. 4. Training through pain: I don’t think I need to go into much detail on this one. Suffice it to say that the overwhelming majority of lifters experience shoulder pain at some point during their time in the iron game. If something causes you pain, don’t do it. Bench pressing is not inherently evil; it’s only a problem when stubborn lifters apply it inappropriately in their programming and perform the exercise itself incorrectly. Adage #7: You should avoid overhead pressing. If this is the case, I guess I better not store anything on the top shelf, huh? Okay, in all seriousness, we need to understand the rationale behind such an assertion before we can get into all the finer subtleties. There are two broad camps: those who say "you just don’t need it" and those who insist that "it’s dangerous." In the former case, the fundamental rationale is essentially one of training economy. If you have a limited amount of time to spend in the gym, and a limited recovery capacity, you need to choose the exercises that will give you the most bang for your training buck without exceeding your body’s capacity to recovery. Many insist that one simply doesn’t need direct "shoulder work" (and I put that in parentheses because I abhor body part training) simply because the deltoids receive adequate stimulus from horizontal pressing (benches), and pulling (rows), and vertical pulling (pull-ups/pulldowns). These folks insist that at the very most, you need a few supplemental sets of lateral raises to target the middle head of the deltoid, and with that completed, you can sit back and wait for your cannonball delts to emerge. Personally, though, I view recovery as systemic more than muscle-specific, so I examine how my overall volume is distributed and then make that determination. In other words, trainees with better recovery capabilities can afford to do this extra volume. Moreover, I look to consider if I need more biomechanical balance in my programming; will some overhead pressing help to "cancel out" some vertical pulling I’m doing? Finally, I look at the demands of the athlete’s sport or the bodybuilder’s goals; if an athlete needs to be strong overhead (e.g. basketball player) or a bodybuilder needs to bring up his taters, I’m going to incorporate overhead pressing at the expense of something else. Ever since I wrote Cracking the Rotator Cuff Conundrum, I’ve been inundated with emails from frustrated trainees with bum shoulders. You know what the vast majority of them share in common? Poor balance in programming, mostly as a result of insisting that they need to have a separate day just for shoulders. Next, we have the "it’s dangerous" camp standing on their soapboxes trying to frighten us all off with a gross generalization. The basis for this allegation is that overhead pressing is dangerous because when you move with the humerus abducted/flexed past 90 degrees (upper arm parallel with the floor), you’re compromising the subacromial space. The tendons of the rotator cuff pass through this space, and IF the rotator cuff is weak and/or the scapula is anteriorly tilted, the space is limited to the point that the tendons will become impinged (hence the term external impingement) between the humeral head and the glenoid fossa (shoulder socket) of the scapula. Did you notice the big, bold "if?" For those with normal positioning of the scapulae and strong, healthy rotator cuffs that can depress the humeral head effectively, there is absolutely no need to avoid overhead pressing out of fear of injury, as there will be sufficient room for the tendons to pass through this space without irritation. Performing the movements in the scapular plane can further reduce the likelihood of subacromial impingement. This plane allows for improved joint surface conformity; appropriate rotator cuff alignment, which leads to increased activity of the infraspinatus and teres minor in stabilization of the humeral head (4,7,8), and minimized stress on the inferior glenohumeral ligament.(9) The scapular plane is located about 30 degrees anterior of the frontal plane. In other words, raise your arm as if you were about to start a rep on the pec deck, and then do 1/3 of cross-chest fly. One can also use a neutral grip to make overhead pressing with dumbbells more safe; this movement at the lower arm corresponds to external rotation of the humerus, which decreases the likelihood of subacromial impingement.(10) Now, there are going to be a ton of individuals who I don’t feel should be overhead pressing. Incidentally, almost all these trainees are outstanding candidates for the programs Mike Robertson and I outlined in Neanderthal No More IV and V. The anteriorly tilted position of the scapulae and internally rotated humeri are problematic in themselves, but when you consider that these postural issues correspond to altered length-tension relationships, and therefore weakness of crucial scapular stabilizers and rotator cuff muscles, overhead pressing is the last thing that these individuals need to consider. In fact, those who are already experiencing shoulder pain shouldn’t even be doing back squats or good mornings until they get these issues resolved. So, to summarize, overhead pressing is cool if a) your shoulder girdles are healthy and strong, b) it can be incorporated without messing up structural balance in your programming, c) your sport/weaknesses necessitate its inclusion, and d) you’re factoring it in to your overall volume equation. And, you can potentially make it even cooler if you’re pressing in the scapular plane with a neutral grip. Adage #8: Behind-the-neck (BTN) movements are dangerous. Concurrent extreme external rotation and abduction has been termed the "at-risk" (or 90/90) position by many practitioners, so behind-the-neck lat pulldowns and presses have been blacklisted. These individuals cite potential problems with anterior glenohumeral instability(4,5), external impingement, internal impingement (a new-age diagnosis common in overhead throwing athletes with hypermobility), acromioclavicular joint degeneration, and even the risk of intervertebral disc injuries (due to the flexed neck position). The infraspinatus and teres minor are shortened in the 90/90 position, and may therefore be ineffective as depressors of the humeral head due to shortcomings in terms of the length-tension relationship.(7) In my opinion, you must view the two exercises independently of one another. For starters, one must differentiate between exercises involving traction and approximation at the glenohumeral joint. Pulldowns (like most cable exercises) are an example of a traction exercise, as they pull the head of the humerus away from the glenoid fossa. Various pressing exercises, on the other hand, involve approximation; they drive the head of the humerus further into the "socket." Approximation exercises increase the likelihood of subacromial impingement much more than traction exercises, and this is why exercises like pulldowns, pull-ups and shrugs can be integrated into rehabilitation programs before various presses. So, on paper, pulldowns in the "at-risk" position are less dangerous than presses. However, in comparison to all the pulldown variations you can do in front of the neck, going BTN is just going to shorten your range of motion and reduce activation of the very musculature you’re trying to train.(11) Plus, it’s just painful to watch people do these because this exercise invariably turns into a jerking, seizure-like motion. The in-front version poses much less risk and offer a better training effect, so why anyone would opt for BTN pulldowns is beyond me. I guess it’s for the same reason some people listen to John Tesh; they just enjoy pain, misery and being looked at like they’re nuts. In spite of the approximation issues, I think that you can make a great case for the inclusion of BTN presses for certain individuals. This position allows for comparable loads to the anterior position without compromising range of motion. If you’re considering implementing the exercise, there are several factors that must be taken into account: 1) Cumulative Volume of the 90/90 position: If you’re already doing back squats and good mornings, you’d likely be better off holding off on BTN presses in order to avoid overloading this potentially harmful position. If you decided to front squat or use a deadlift variation instead of good mornings, though, you might clear up some "space" for BTN presses. You need to consider this cumulative volume from both an acute and chronic sense. There may even be times in the year when you avoid the 90/90 position altogether. 2) Cumulative Trauma to the Anterior Shoulder Capsule: The 90/90 position isn’t the only thing that can irritate the anterior shoulder capsule. Bench pressing and pulldowns/pull-ups also contribute to cumulative stress on this area. I know that I can’t handle BTN pressing with my powerlifting volume, and I can’t say that I know many powerlifters who utilize BTN presses on a regular basis. We simply get enough stress on this front (pun intended) from squats, good mornings, and bench press variations. As is the case with #1, you need to consider both acute and chronic trauma. 3) Goal of Inclusion: Very simply, you need to ask yourself: why are you doing this exercise? If you’re someone with much to be gained from BTN presses, then they deserve much more consideration than if you’re a regular ol’ weekend warrior or senior citizen who is just interested in getting in shape and staying healthy. As I noted with good mornings in Part I, it all comes down to how much you’re willing to risk. 4) Flexibility: In order to be able to perform BTN movements with the most safety, one needs to have a considerable amount of humeral external rotation range of motion. As a rule of thumb, if someone has trouble back squatting with anything narrower than an ultra-wide grip, I don’t want them doing BTN pressing. 5) Injury History: If you have a history of rotator cuff problems, I’d advise against performing BTN movements unless you’ve been asymptomatic for an extended period of time. Even then, approach the exercise with caution in your programming and carefully consider your alternatives. 6) Posture: This issue parallels #4 for several reasons. First, if you’ve got significant anterior tilt and winging of the scapulae and internal rotation of the humeri, you aren’t going to have the flexibility to get into the proper position to do BTN presses. And, even if you can manage to squirm your way under the bar, when you start to press, you’ll be at greater risk of subacromial impingement due to the inability of the scapulae to posteriorly tilt with overhead pressing. This is a common scapular dyskinesis pattern related to weakness of several scapular stabilizers, most notably the serratus anterior. Of perhaps greater concern is the tendency to want to compensate for this lack of flexibility by either flexing the neck—something you want to avoid at all costs in a weight-training context—or allowing forward head posture (where the chin protrudes off a less-flexed neck) to take over. Most people have problems with forward head posture, so the last thing you want to do is reinforce it. The take-home message on BTN movements is that BTN pulldowns belong in the garbage can, and BTN presses should be used sparingly only in those who meet certain criteria, can effectively write strength training programs, and are willing to assume a bit of risk. Adage #9: Upright rows are shoulder killers. I’ll be blunt: in my experience, of all the potentially harmful exercises for the shoulder girdle, this one warrants the most apprehension. Remember how I spoke earlier about using a neutral grip to "open up" the subacromial space when overhead pressing? Well, the theory behind this recommendation is that supinating the forearm to the neutral position corresponds to externally rotating the humerus and, in turn, adjusting the alignment of the humeral head in the glenoid fossa to mechanically make room for the tendons of the rotator cuff to do their thing. A barbell upright row does the exact opposite of this; the maximally internally rotated position of the humerus that corresponds to the pronated grip isn’t an ideal position—especially if you’re going to be abducting/flexing the humerus (as in an upright row). You may be someone who has seen fantastic results with upright rows, but personally, I don’t write them into any of my programs. If I want to overload the delts, I can do so via more effective means (benching, overhead pressing, rows, pull-ups and lateral raises). If I want to overload the upper traps, I’ll stick with deadlifts, Olympic lifts, and shrugs; all allow for greater loading and a more systemic effect. If you feel like you really need to include some sort of upright rowing variation, I’d encourage you to use dumbbells, which allow you to adjust the plane of motion and grip to some extent, and thus reduce the aforementioned risks. Now, you may be wondering why barbell upright rows aren’t on my list of favorites, yet I don’t advocate against Olympic lifts. Good question! Here’s my rationale…. For proper functioning of the glenohumeral joint beyond 50 degrees of abduction or flexion, you need some external rotation to occur.(12) Obviously, dumbbells are very practical and safe in this regard, but you might be surprised to discover that barbells are in fact just as safe when the Olympic lifts and their variations are executed correctly. There are several subtle, yet significant differences between (for example) the high pull and the upright row. First and foremost, the upper body aspect of the high pull is assisted by the hip and knee extensors and ankle plantarflexors; this triple extension lessens the burden on the shoulder girdle. In essence, the lifter is executing a lower body exercise, but integrating a violent shrugging motion while maintaining the extended elbow position for as long as possible. Effectively, this teaches the lifter to pull with the lower body and upper traps — not with the deltoids and biceps. If O-lifting makes you sorer in your shoulders and arms than in your upper back and posterior chain, I suggest you find a good USA Weightlifting coach before your next session. Overdeveloped deltoids (relative to the depressors of the humerus) are a common culprit when it comes to subacromial impingement; by lessening their involvement, there is less "encouragement" to humeral abduction than that which is generated simply from momentum from other muscles. Second, the explosive manner in which the Olympic lifts are executed corresponds to partial temporary deloading at the portion of the movement where the rotator cuff is most at risk of impingement, whereas the resistance is constant in a slow-paced movement like the upright row. This effect is even more pronounced in clean and snatch variations where the lifter attempts to get under the bar as quickly as possible; in experienced weightlifters, the bar doesn’t even reach the 50-degree mark. Even if it does pass the 50-degree point, you’re still externally rotating the humerus to complete the clean or snatch, so you’re in the clear. In ACSM Recap: Part I, I quoted accomplished weightlifter and coach Gary Valentine recalling that the late Joe Mills used to say, "Any weight that you can get past your belly button with some momentum, you can clean."(13) No delts needed; my apologies to the bodybuilders in the crowd. Third, the movement of the torso is markedly different between the Olympic lifts and the upright row. In the former, the lifter is extending the torso as the bar is pulled upward, so while the upper trapezius is primarily active as a scapular elevator, it’s also active (along with the middle and lower trapezius and rhomboids) as a scapular retractor in an attempt to keep the bar close to the body. Watch anyone do an upright row, and you’ll see that they don’t really care about bar path unless they’re trying to make the movement easier by bringing the barbell closer to them. This movement is accomplished by positioning of the deltoids—not active contraction of crucial scapular stabilizers. Because the trapezius complex works synergistically with the serratus anterior in posteriorly tilting the scapula (which mechanically increases the subacromial space with overhead activities), activating the whole trap shebang helps to keep the shoulders healthy. Fourth, typical volume schemes for upright rows and Olympic lifts are completely different. O-lifters rarely (and shouldn’t) exceed sets of 5-6 reps, as the Olympic lifts and their variations are highly technical movements that should be performed rapidly. Conversely, upright rows are performed at bodybuilding tempos (read: slower than molasses going uphill on a cold winter day) with as many as 15-20 reps per set in some programs. Over time, this volume adds up, especially when it’s accompanied by loads of pressing lateral raises, and pull-up variations. Fifth, you need a significant amount of upper body flexibility to execute the Olympic lifts properly. Any schmuck can walk into a gym and try an upright row. As such, the former carries much less risk; think of this flexibility as the ID you need to get into the Olympic lifting nightclub. If you have it, you’re on the inside with fancy martinis and gorgeous women. If you don’t, you’re stuck in the alley with a "40" in a paper bag, some homely old skank, and a bum shoulder to boot…or something like that. Just use your imagination. Adage #10: Sit-ups are dangerous. We might as well conclude with one of the oldest—yet still unresolved—debates in our industry. As a little background, there’s considerable opposition to the use of sit-up variations in exercise programming for several reasons: 1. Generally, individuals perform sit-ups because they assume they’re training their abdominals; it’s too bad that sit-ups preferentially recruit the hip flexors! When compared to the curl-up (which is about as good as they come in terms of "isolating" the rectus abdominis), the sit-up elicits significantly higher activation of the rectus femoris and psoas major (two hip flexors).(14,15) Contrary to popular belief, performing sit-ups with the knees bent does not take the rectus femoris out of the movement; in fact, its activation is higher with the knees flexed !(14,16) 2. The psoas major has attachments on the T12 and each of the lumbar vertebrae. When activated, it imposes significant compression (~3,300 N, 730 lbs.) on the spine. Coincidentally, McGill (2004) reported that 3,300 N is also the action limit for low back compression in workers as set forth by the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH, or the Canadian equivalent of OSHA). In other words, each sit-up you perform exceeds the level of loading that is associated with an increased risk of on-the-job injuries!(17) 3. In the classic postural distortion patterns, the hip flexors are overactive and the rectus abdominis is relatively "dormant." Curl-up variations offer greater activation of the rectus abdominis without the compressive loading and shear stress on the lumbar spine (15), and can therefore be a valuable part of programs to prevent or rehabilitate low back injuries and improve lumbo-pelvic posture. These three reasons are sufficient justification for omitting sit-ups altogether if you’re purely looking to "isolate" the rectus abdominis and train for general health; there are clearly numerous other options available to you that offer greater efficacy at lower compressive loads. What about sit-ups for performance, though? One of the limiting factors to sprinting performance is hip flexion power; however, one must be very careful with direct training for the hip flexors due to the aforementioned spinal compression imposed by the psoas major. Traditional sit-ups are certainly a means of training for both power and strength of the hip flexors, but personally, I use them very sparingly in the programming for athletes. Very simply, direct hip flexion training is not placed at a high priority, as many athletes have more pressing needs—most notably those related to the classical postural distortions referenced earlier. For these individuals, sit-ups simply compound the problem. There are those, however, who can derive benefit from training dedicated specifically to hip flexion. In these instances, I prefer movements that incorporate simultaneous hip extension on the opposite leg and some arm action, preferably in the standing position. Sled dragging and exercises with cables and bands are useful in this regard, as are sprinter sit-ups. As far as I’m concerned, most athletes did enough sit-ups in grade school to last them a lifetime; I’d rather give them some safer exercises with greater functional carryover to sport. Occasionally, though, I’ll write them into programming to offer a bit of novelty. Regardless of the hip flexion exercise, it’s imperative that the athlete maintains a neutral spine position and braces the abdominals. And, even before undertaking such an exercise, the coach should be considering whether or not that athlete could be doing something more productive instead. Closing Thoughts One thing that I’ve tried to emphasize throughout these two articles is that I want you to think for yourselves when deciding if some of these exercises are acceptable for you. I recall Dr. Ken Kinakin once wisely saying that people—and not exercises—should be contraindicated. Be honest with yourself in your evaluation of your own risks, your injury history, your goals, and the cost-benefit ratio should be clear. About the Author Eric Cressey, BS, CSCS is currently pursuing a Master's Degree in Kinesiology with a concentration in Exercise Science at the University of Connecticut. A competitive powerlifter, Eric has written over fifty articles for publication in various online and print magazines. He has experience in athletic performance, rehabilitation, human performance laboratory and general conditioning settings. You can contact him at ericcressey@hotmail.com. References 1. Fees M, Decker T, Snyder-Mackler L, Axe MJ. Upper extremity weight-training modifications for the injured athlete. A clinical perspective. Am J Sports Med. 1998 Sep-Oct;26(5):732-42. 2. Elliott BC, Wilson GJ, Kerr GK. A biomechanical analysis of the sticking region in the bench press. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1989 Aug;21(4):450-62. 3. Madsen N, McLaughlin T. Kinematic factors influencing performance and injury risk in the bench press exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1984 Aug;16(4):376-81. 4. Gross ML, Brenner SL, Esformes I, Sonzogni JJ. Anterior shoulder instability in weight lifters. Am J Sports Med. 1993 Jul-Aug;21(4):599-603. 5. Neviaser TJ: Weight lifting: risks and injuries to the shoulder. Clin Sports Med 1991;10(3):615-621 6. Cahill BR: Osteolysis of the distal part of the clavicle in male athletes. J Bone Joint Surg (Am) 1982;64(7):1053-1058 7.Rosenthal, MD. Shoulder savers: alterations of traditional exercises. Strength Cond. J. 1997;19(2): 7-10. 8. Greenfield BH, Donatelli R, Wooden MJ, Wilkes J. Isokinetic evaluation of shoulder rotational strength between the plane of scapula and the frontal plane. Am J Sports Med. 1990 Mar-Apr;18(2):124-8. 9. O'Connell PW, Nuber GW, Mileski RA, Lautenschlager E. The contribution of the glenohumeral ligaments to anterior stability of the shoulder joint. Am J Sports Med. 1990 Nov-Dec;18(6):579-84. 10. Moseley JB Jr, Jobe FW, Pink M, Perry J, Tibone J. EMG analysis of the scapular muscles during a shoulder rehabilitation program. Am J Sports Med. 1992 Mar-Apr;20(2):128-34. 11. Signorile JF, Zink AJ, Szwed SP. A comparative electromyographical investigation of muscle utilization patterns using various hand positions during the lat pull-down. J Strength Cond Res. 2002 Nov;16(4):539-46. 12. Cibrario, M. Preventing weight room rotator cuff tendonitis: a guide to muscular balance. Strength Cond. J. 1997;19(2): 22-25. 13. Cressey, E. ACSM Recap: Part I. Testosterone Magazine. 30 Nov 2004. http://www.t-nation.com/readTopic.do?id=527120. 14. Juker, D, McGill, S, Krpof, P, Steffen, T. Quantitative intramuscular myoelectric activity of lumbar portions of psoas and the abdominal wall during a wide variety of tasks. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 1998;30:301—310. 15. Guimaraes AC, Vaz MA, De Campos MI, Marantes R. The contribution of the rectus abdominis and rectus femoris in twelve selected abdominal exercises. An electromyographic study. J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 1991 Jun;31(2):222-30. 16. McGill SM. The mechanics of torso flexion: situps and standing dynamic flexion manoeuvres. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 1995 Jun;10(4):184-192. 17. McGill, S. Ultimate Back Fitness and Performance. Stuart McGill, PhD, 2004. © 1998 — 2005 Testosterone, LLC. All Rights Reserved. -------------- Iron and chalk. Pain is only temporary, it is in your mind. If you can still walk, then you can still run.
	2006/01/29, 07:11 PM great post wrestler...2nd article cleared up some things for me....I like how he clarifies the lack of dangers in certain exercises yet still deems them ineffective for inclusion in his programs....that's an interesting way to think about it..
wrestler125 Posts: 4,619 Joined: 2004/01/27	2006/01/29, 10:36 PM Thats how I look at it. Everyone says don't do upright rows because of impingement. I say dont do them because wtf do they do anyway that overhead work won't? Or leg extensions? BTN pulldowns? -------------- Iron and chalk. Pain is only temporary, it is in your mind. If you can still walk, then you can still run.