This Bodybuilder Says That Aerobic Excercise Is (GASP!) HARMFUL!!! Rebut Him, Letsrun!

wellnow wrote:

I'm interested in trying new ways of improving my training, and interested in how we learn new skills, but as far as the latest research in the neurology of movement, I have no knowledge of what new infomation recent brain scans have revealed about what is going on in the brain, which parts of the brain are processing which information. I would like to read more about this. The information I do have is very old.

I am not sure there is much new in this area. It seems like we lack the techniques to really answer these questions.

Unfortunately functional imagaging of the brain by MRI or even NIRS can't really help us here. MRI can't becuase it's really sensitive to movement so we are unable to make measurements while individuals are performing any type of dynamic exercise or even any exercise that requires activation of a large amount of muscle mass.

We can measure responses in the brain to handgrip exercise but I have yet to see anyone do anything more complicated. Again part of this is because MR imaging is very sensitive to movement in that movement causes artifacts in the images that are not easily dealt with. Another reason is that most magnets have a fairly small bore that limits movement. The "open" magnets hold potential but that are lower field strengths so the signal to noise ratio is poor.

Not too many people put a lot of faith in NIRS (optical imaging of chromophores) in vivo and with dynamic exercise although I think in certain situations it's fine.

Where does this leave us? I don't know. We can continue to speculate that adaptations in muscle recruitment patterns underlie the long term changes in running performance and running economy however, we can't really test that hypothesis because we lack the techniques.

I think you are mixing up two things:- "aerobic development" is about improving performance by increasing your body's ability to use more oxygen to generate more energy, i.e. improving your aerobic capacity (VO2max) and lactate threshold (lactate clearance and lactate tolerance) and aerobic threshold- "efficiency (and economy)" improvements is about improving performance in output power (or velocity, respectively) for the same energy (oxygen) cost. By definition and measure, these improvements can only be non-aerobic.If I may take the liberty to speak for "wellnow", his objection is that VO2Max isn't everything, Lactate Threshold and Aerobic Threshold isn't anything, and no one ever talks about the economy.

edumacator wrote:

But then that means that your only objection to other posters on this site is in the name "aerobic development". Because we are all referring to the same thing: the ability of the body to more efficiently use oxygen for aerobic exercise. Why do you have such a strong resistance to the use of "aerobic development" to mean developing your leg muscles ability to use oxygen (the "aero" in "aerobic")?

what??? wrote:

wellnow-

I'd be interested in hearing your ideas on WHY EPO and similar drugs work?

Also, how does your neural theory explain the development of a MaxLASS at race speeds for some of Renato's athletes over 5k and 10k?

We can hold our distance paces for longer periods if we have more oxygen available. That is an undisputed fact, proven many times in many ways over many years. Injecting EPO over several weeks raises VO2max above normal levels, and that is why it has been so popular amongst elite athletes. And that also is why it's illegal, because it is a performance enhancing drug.

Are you refering to the very high lactate levels observed by Renato and others in 5000 and 10000m races?

These runners train to be very efficient at both low and high blood lactate levels. They can run faster at any given lactate level than American runners, because they have trained to do so. During their fundamental training period, they will be running at good paces with relatively low lactate levels, partly because they are running high mileage and have less glycogen available for much of the time, thus they produce less pyruvate and lactate.

However, during the specific period of training, they get more rest and more easy days, so they have more glycogen available, and they practice running at faster paces. They are still very efficient at their hypothetical marathon pace 2-3 mmols of blood lactate, but they are also running so fast in their hard sessions that they get used to running at very high bloodd lactate levels also. But they can only do this when they are well rested and have plenty of glycogen in the tank and push themselves very very hard in those sessions at extremely fast paces for long periods of time. Renato mentions Kemboi running 5x 2000m in 5.20 with 90 seconds recovery in Sondrio which is about an hours drive from St Moritz where he had been training. St Moritz is 1800m, 6000ft and Sondrio is 300m, 1000ft. 5.20's is 26.40 pace, Kemboi ran 26.31 but was outkicked by Gebreselassie.

Sir Lance-alot wrote:

What about improvements in burning fat as a % of substrates used (as Renato recently discussed on his thread about recent fast Kenyan marathons) ? Where does that fall in your aerobic capacity / neural skill dichotomy?

.... if do squats 3 times a week, and also some plyo's, and now I can create more force( activate more fibers) more efficiently, have I really improved my running "skill", or have I just got more powerful/stronger? I would say more the latter (though it is a matter of terms).

During a marathon, we start off in the first mile burning mostly glycogen and blood glucose and a very small amount of fat. As each mile passes, the amount of glycogen and blood glucose we use becomes less and less and fat use increases. In the last few miles we are burning a lot of fat and this makes it very hard to maintain pace, especially as we are also very tired. The ability to maintain our pace is dependant on our skill level, as well as other factors.

Weight lifting strength is also a skill.

NONAME is spot on about a little knowledge being a dangerous thing. While I'm all for self-education as well as not blindly listening to experts, there's the opposite problem of using facile interpretations of science. As NONAME says, we must evaluate as much evidence as possible while making tentative conclusions. Reasonable (rational) certainty is far more rare than most people realize. Sadly, zealotry is more common.

As a Ph.D. myself, in a field totally unrelated to physiology or exercise, I try to apply my research skills to topics like this that matter to me. I've been following Internet debate about "aerobic" versus "anaerobic" benefits for years. Fortunately, there are some moderate voices out there. One in particular, Tom Venuto (http://www.burnthefatblog) is a bodybuilder who understands research and doesn't seem to have a lopsided agenda. He does an effective job of debunking the anti-aerobic folks, particularly since he could easily be one of them.

One of the best contributions on the Internet to this debate comes from Dr. Len Kravitz, Associate Professor of Exercise Sciences, at University of New Mexico (http://www.drlenkravitz.com). There are several informative articles posted at his Website. Here's an article he wrote that speaks directly to this debate:

Aerobics vs. Resistance Training: Is This the Battle of the Fitness Titans?

Len Kravitz, Ph.D.

For years the virtues and values of aerobic exercise have been extolled and celebrated while the benefits of resistance training have been minimized to that of building muscles and improving sports performance. More recently, the traditional perception of resistance training has undergone a revitalization due to scientific evidence suggesting powerful health status betterment. In fact, for those of you spending many a moment on the Internet, there are a lot of voices out there in the ‘World Wide Web’ now chanting that resistance training is the superior and only form of exercise you need. How the pendulum has changed! The good news is that the evidence supports remarkable claims for aerobics and resistance training for improvement in health. This battle of the ‘fitness titans‘ is attributable, unfortunately, to a blaring cluster of uninformed individuals. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to provide scientific evidence how resistance training and aerobic exercise are key constituents of health, fitness and longevity (summarized in Table 1), and bring to realization that including both of them in our physical activity programs allows our students and clients to be the biggest winners.

Bone Mineral Density

Physical activities that stimulate bone growth need to include progressive overload, variation of load, and specificity of loading (Conroy, Kraemer, Maresh, & Dalsky, 1992) . Specificity of loading refers to exercises that directly place a load on a certain region of the skeleton. With osteoporosis, a degenerative disease characterized by a loss of bone mineral density resulting in a susceptibility to bone fractures and health problems, it appears resistance training and aerobic exercise may provide the needed stimulus for bone formation (Rubin & Lanyon, 1984) . Progressive overload is necessary so the bone and associated connective tissue do not exceed the critical level that would place them at risk. In an eight-month study of premenopausal women doing resistance exercise or jogging, bone mineral density improved in both groups with no difference between groups (Snow-Harter, Going, & Pamenter, 1995) . It appears that increases of bone mineral density are site-specific. Hamdy et al (1994) reported greater increases in bone tissue in the upper arm of resistance trained subjects as compared to runners, although both groups showed similar changes in the lower body. Exercise programs to increase bone growth should be full-body in nature, including exercises such as squats and lunges which direct the forces through the axial skeleton and allow greater loads to be utilized (Conroy & Earle, 1994) . In addition, evidence does suggest that moderate weight-bearing activity, such as brisk walking done regularly, and for a long-term basis, is effective in averting age-related bone loss (Vuori, 1995)

Hypertension

Hypertension is a major health problem. Elevated systolic and diastolic blood pressure is associated with a higher risk of developing coronary artery disease (CAD), congestive heart failure, stroke, and kidney failure. There is a onefold increase in developing these diseases when blood pressure is 140/90 mmHg (Bouchard & Despres, 1995) . It is necessary for the fitness professional to also educate clients that reducing weight and lowering alcohol and salt intake may help reduce elevated blood pressure in many cases. Intervention studies have shown that regular aerobic activity can reduce systolic and diastolic blood pressure by approximately 10 mmHg (Hagberg, 1990) . Also, moderate-intensity exercise (40%-70% of VO2max) tends to produce greater decreases in resting blood pressure than higher intensity exercise. Although regular aerobic exercise will not likely affect normotensive individuals, habitual aerobic exercise may be protective against the increase in blood pressure commonly seen with increasing age (Blair, Goodyear, Gibbons, & Cooper, 1984) .

During resistance exercise, systolic and diastolic blood pressures may show steep increases, which indicates that caution should be observed with persons with known cardiovascular disease or risk factors (Stone, Fleck, Triplett, & Kramer, 1991) . These increases in blood pressure are dependent on the intensity of the contraction, the length of time the contraction is held, and the amount of muscle mass involved in the contraction (Fleck, 1988) . More dynamic forms of resistance training, such as circuit training, that involve moderate resistance and high repetitions with short rests are associated with reductions in blood pressure. Studies have shown decreases in diastolic blood pressure (Harris & Holly, 1987) , no change in blood pressure (Blumenthal, Siegel, & Appelbaum, 1991) , and decreases in systolic blood pressure (Hagberg et al., 1984; Hurley, Hagberg, & Goldberg, 1988) . More research is necessary to clearly understand the role of resistance training in blood pressure management.

Resting Heart Rate

In terms of chronic adaptations, there appears to be a reduction in heart rate from resistance training, which is considered favorable (Stone et al., 1991) . Long term adaptations observed in the research show from no change up to a 11% decrease in heart rate, which may be explained by the differences in intensity, volume, rest between sets, use of small vs. large muscle mass, duration of study and fitness level of the subjects.

Regular participation in aerobic exercise often results in a decrease in resting heart rate by 5 to 25 beats per minute. The lowered resting heart rate from exercise training is proposed to be due primarily to an increase in the parasympathetic nervous activity with a minor decrease in sympathetic nervous discharge (Katona, McLean, Dighton, & Guz, 1982; Smith, Hudson, Graitzer, & Raven, 1989) .

Blood Lipids and Lipoproteins

It is well-established that low plasma triglycerides, total cholesterol, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels, as well as elevated high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels, are associated with a lowered CAD risk. Regular aerobic exercise has been shown to lower blood triglycerides in individuals with initially high levels, with no influence on persons with normal concentrations. All intensity (low, medium, high) levels of aerobic exercise have shown increases in HDL-C, particularly the HDL2 subfraction, as well as favorably altering total cholesterol and LDL-C (Bouchard & Despres, 1995) . The commonality seen in endurance exercise programs that positively affects blood lipid profiles is that the training creates a substantial negative energy balance (Despres & Lamarche, 1994) .

Although several studies have shown favorable impact of resistance training on blood lipids, several others have reported no change. It has been suggested that the resistance programs that best modify blood lipid profiles incorporate larger muscle mass, multi-segment exercises with a high total volume (reps x sets x load) prescription (Stone et al., 1991) . Additional research needs to be conducted which controls for body composition changes, day-to-day variations in lipoproteins, dietary factors, and possible other training adaptations to provide a more credible summary of the effect of resistance training on blood lipids and lipoproteins.

Glucose Metabolism

Elevated insulin and blood glucose levels are characteristic features involved in the development of non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus, which develops primarily in adult women and men who are overweight and have excess abdominal fat tissue. One of the benefits of aerobic exercise is the improvement of the sensitivity of liver, skeletal muscle and adipose tissues to insulin action. A decrease in blood plasma glucose in hyperglycemic individuals is also see with chronic aerobic activity. There is very persuasive evidence, from three large studies, that regular aerobic activity actually plays a substantial role in maintaining normoglycemia and insulin sensitivity in nondiabetic individuals (Bouchard & Despres, 1995) .

Improvements in glucose metabolism with strength training, independent of alterations in aerobic capacity or percent body fat, have also been shown (Hurley et al., 1988; Smutok, Reece, & Kokkinos, 1993) . Smutok et al. (1993) concluded that strength training and aerobic training improved glucose tolerance and reduced insulin responses to oral glucose (in men) similarly. It appears that both resistance training and aerobic exercise offer a strong protective role in the prevention of non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus.

Cardiorespiratory Fitness

Numerous controlled training studies have tested for the effects of intensity, duration and frequency of aerobic exercise on maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max). A minimum of 20 minutes of aerobic exercise at 50% or more of the individual’s VO2max, on three or more days per week, will produce a 10% to 20% increase in VO2max in most sedentary persons (ACSM, 1995) . The literature thoroughly supports the evidence that exercise intensity is directly related to the change in VO2max (Gossard et al., 1986) . Higher doses of aerobic exercise produces greater increases in VO2max, although these improvements are not proportionately greater.

Traditional resistance training that employs sets followed by 1 to 2 minutes of rest has not shown an increase in VO2max. Studies have shown little to mild improvement in aerobic capacity (5% to 9.5%) from participation in circuit weight training (Kass & Castriotta, 1994; Peterson, Miller, Quinney, & Wenger, 1988) . Kass and Castriotta suggest that the mild increases in aerobic capacity are due primarily to increases in fat-free mass from the circuit weight training, and not changes from the main factors affecting aerobic capacity: cardiac output (heart rate x stroke volume) or arterial-venous oxygen difference (exchange of oxygen and carbon dioxide at the cellular level).

Body Composition

A negative energy balance generated by cardiorespiratory activity, instead of reduced caloric intake, and sustained for several months has been shown to result in weight loss that is predominantly attributable to a loss of body fat (Bouchard & Despres, 1995) . In contrast, when the negative energy balance is caused by lower energy intake (through diet alone), one also loses a significant amount of lean tissues, which may be as much as 50% of the total weight loss (Tremblay, Despres, & Bouchard, 1985) .

Resistance training and circuit training studies have shown decreases in body weight and fat mass with comparable increases in fat-free mass (Gettman & Pollock, 1981) . One of the noteworthy benefits of resistance exercise, as it relates to weight loss, is the positive impact of increasing energy expenditure during the exercise session and on maintaining, or increasing, fat-free body mass while encouraging the loss of fat body weight (Young & Steinhard, 1995) . An impressive finding to highlight with resistance training is that the energy expenditure following higher total volume workouts appears to be elevated, with an increase in fat utilization (due to a lower respiratory exchange ratio) during this period (Melby, Scholl, Edwards, & Bullough, 1993) . The evidence unequivocally supports the combined use of aerobic exercise and resistance training for optimal changes in body composition to successfully attain weight management goals.

Resting Metabolic Rate

The largest single source of energy expenditure is the resting metabolic rate, which is defined as the energy necessary to maintain the body’s physiological systems at rest. It is accountable for 60% to 75% of the daily energy expenditure and closely associated to the fat-free body mass. Some researchers have shown that resting metabolic rate may be influenced by aerobic exercise training while others have failed to show a difference. Tremblay et al (1985) measured resting metabolic rate in untrained, moderately trained (6-10 hrs of vigorous exercise weekly) and highly trained (12-16 hours of vigorous) young males. Results showed that the relative resting metabolic rate was significantly increased in the highly trained subjects, while no difference was seen between the moderately trained and untrained subjects. It has been suggested that this increased resting metabolic rate, observed in high-intensity aerobic endurance training, may be a result of an increased energy intake and expenditure (high caloric turnover) and other accumulative factors due to intensity, duration and frequency affecting post-exercise energy expenditure (Van Zant, 1992) .

Several studies, with adult men and women of various ages, have demonstrated significant increases in lean body mass which has been shown to increase resting metabolic rate (Pratley et al., 1994). The key factor seen in the training programs appears to be the total volume of training using the major muscle masses of the body (Stone et al., 1991).

Musculoskeletal Health

Muscle mass, strength, power and endurance are all important for the prevention of several diseases, injuries and the improvement of movement capabilities. Although these components of musculoskeletal health show substantial decreases with age, it has been suggested that this is due largely to a decrease in physical activity, and not solely age (Bassey & Harries, 1993) . This decrease in strength is linked to decreased mobility and increased risk of falling, which has been identified as the most frequent cause of injury related to mortality (Pollock, Vincent, Corbin, & Pangrazi, 1996) . Substantial improvement in all of the components of musculoskeletal health, as a result of resistance training, have been shown in sedentary, disabled, young, physically active, and very old frail individuals (Vuori, 1995) .

Functional Capabilities

Functional capabilities can be defined as the ability to perform basic physical actions such as walking, climbing stairs, reaching, stooping, bending and grasping, which are fundamental components of daily living. Experimental and observational research show that aerobic exercise and resistance training contribute to the maintenance of functional capabilities during aging (Buchner, Beresford, Larson, LaCroix, & Wagner, 1992; Wagner & Lacroix, 1992) . Also, comprehensive programs for the improvement of low back health include aerobic exercise and muscular fitness exercises (Plowman, 1992) .

Longevity

Estimates of the extension of life comparing men who expended&Mac179;2,000 kilocalories per week in physical activity, including walking, recreational activities and stair climbing, to men who expended <500 kilocalories per week in similar activities, for over 16 years, found the active men to live upwards of two years longer (Paffenbarger & Lee, 1996) . This difference held after controlling for cigarette smoking, body weight, hypertension, and age. Similarly, with regular walking, cycling and cross-country skiing as the activity variables of interest (and then standarizing for age, systolic blood pressure, cholesterol, and body mass), researchers in Eastern Finland showed that active men live an extra 2.1 years when compared to their inactive counterparts, during a 20-year study (Paffenbarger & Lee, 1996) . Indeed, a convincing relationship exists between moderate-intensity physical activity and longevity.

Directions for the Future

Numerous health and fitness benefits have been documented for both resistance training and aerobic exercise. If health and fitness professionals prescribe to the new expanding model of ‘physical activity for the enhancement of health,’ it is clear that program prescriptions need to include resistance training and aerobic exercise. With the merging of the computer and communication technologies, broad access to the Internet and World Wide Web will be more available and affordable. This presents new opportunities and challenges for health professionals. More education and information about health, fitness and longevity will be easier to disseminate to an interested, growing audience. However, one impact is clear, with more time spent on a computer, people may find it harder to find time for physical activity. Instead of debating the pros and cons of aerobic vs. resistance training, perhaps we as a profession should focus now on how to best design optimal workout programs for the demands of the next century.

References:

ACSM. (1995). Guidelines for graded exercise testing and prescription (5th ed). Baltimore, MD: Lea & Febiger.

Bassey, E. J., & Harries, U. J. (1993). Normal values for hand grip strength in 920 men and women aged 65 years, and longitudinal changes over 4 years in 620 survivors. Clinical Science, 82, 331-337.

Blair, S. N., Goodyear, N. N., Gibbons, L. W., & Cooper, K. N. (1984). Physical fitness and incidence of hypertension in healthy normotensive men and women. Journal of the American Medical Association, 252, 487-490.

Blumenthal, J. A., Siegel, W. C., & Appelbaum, M. (1991). Failure of exercise to reduce blood pressure in patients with mild hypertension. Journal of the American Medical Association, 266, 2098-2104.

Bouchard, C., & Despres, J.-P. (1995). Physical activity and health: Atherosclerotic, metabolic, and hypertensive disease. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 66, 268-275.

Buchner, D. M., Beresford, S. A. A., Larson, E. B., LaCroix, A., & Wagner, E. H. (1992). Effects of physical activity on health status in older adults II: Intervention studies. Annual Review of Public Health, 13, 469-488.

Conroy, B. P., & Earle, R. W. (1994). Bone, muscle and connective tissue adaptations to physical activity. In T. R. Baechle (Ed.), Essentials of strength training and conditioning (pp. 51-66). Champaign: Human Kinetics.

Conroy, B. P., Kraemer, W. J., Maresh, C. M., & Dalsky, G. P. (1992). Adaptive responses of bone to physical activity. Medicine Exercise Nutrition Health, 1, 64-74.

Despres, J.-P., & Lamarche, B. (1994). Low-intensity endurance training, plasma lipoproteins, and the risk of coronary heart disease. Journal of Internal Medicine, 236, 7-22.

Fleck, S. J. (1988). Cardiovascular adaptations to resistance training. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 20 (Suppl.), S146-S151.

Gettman, L. R., & Pollock, M. L. (1981). Circuit weight training: A critical review of its physiological benefits. The Physician and Sportsmedicine, 9(1), 44-60.

Gossard, D., Haskell, W. L., Taylor, B., Mueller, J. R., Rogers, F., Chandler, M., Ahn, D. K., Miller, N. H., & Debusk, R. F. (1986). Effects of low-and high-intensity home-based exercise training on functional capacity in healthy middle-age men. American Journal of Cardiology, 57, 446-449.

Hagberg, J. M. (1990). Exercise, fitness and hypertension. In C. Bouchard, R. J. Shephard, T. Stephens, J. R. Sutton, & B. D. McPherson (Eds.), Exercise, fitness and health: A consensus of current knowledge (pp. 455-466). Champaign: Human Kinetics.

Hagberg, J. M., Ehsani, A. A., Goldring, O., Hernandez, A., Sinacore, D. R., & Holloszy, J. O. (1984). Effect of weight training on blood pressure and hemodynamics in hypertensive adolescents. Journal of Pediatrics, 19, 147-151.

Hamdy, R., Anderson, J., Whalen, K., & Harvill, L. (1994). Regional differences in bone density of young men involved in different exercises. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 26, 150-154.

Harris, K. A., & Holly, R. G. (1987). Physiological response to circuit weight training in borderline hypertensive subjects. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 19, 246-252.

Hurley, B. F., Hagberg, J. M., & Goldberg, A. P. (1988). Resistive training can reduce coronary risk factors without altering VO2max or percent body fat. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 20, 150-154.

Kass, J. E., & Castriotta, R. J. (1994). The effect of circuit weight training on cardiovascular function in healthy sedentary males. Journal of Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation, 14, 378-383.

Katona, P. G., McLean, M., Dighton, D. H., & Guz, A. (1982). Sympathetic and parasympathetic cardiac control in athletes and nonathletes at rest. Journal of Applied Physiology, 52, 1652-1657.

Melby, C., Scholl, C., Edwards, G., & Bullough, R. (1993). Effect of acute resistance exercise on postexercise energy expenditure and resting metabolic rate. Journal of Applied Physiology, 75, 1847-1853.

Paffenbarger, R. S., & Lee, I.-M. (1996). Physical activity and fitness for health and longevity. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 67, S11-S28.

Peterson, S. R., Miller, G. D., Quinney, H. A., & Wenger, H. A. (1988). The influence of high-velocity resistance circuit training on aerobic power. Journal of Orthopedic and Sports Physical Therapy, 9, 339-344.

Plowman, S. A. (1992). Physical activity, physical fitness, and low back pain. In J. O. Holloszy (Ed.), Exercise and Sport Sciences Reviews (Vol. 20, pp. 221-242). Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins.

Pollock, M. L., Vincent, K. R., Corbin, C., & Pangrazi, B. (1996). Resistance training for health. The President’s Council on Physical Fitness and Sports Research Digest, 2, 1-6.

Pratley, R., Nicklas, B., Rubin, M., Miller, J., Smith, A., Smith, M. Hurley, B., & Goldberg, A. (1994). Strength training increases resting metabolic rate and norepinephrine levels in healthy 50- to 65-yr-old men. Journal of Applied Physiology, 76, 133-137.

Rubin, C. T., & Lanyon, L. E. (1984). Regulation of bone formation by applied dynamic loads. Journal of Bone Joint Surgery, 66, 397-402.

Smith, M. L., Hudson, D. L., Graitzer, H. M., & Raven, P. B. (1989). Exercise training bradycardia: the role of autonomic balance. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 21, 40-44.

Smutok, M. A., Reece, C., & Kokkinos, P. F. (1993). Aerobic vs. strength training for risk factor intervention in middle-aged men at high risk for coronary heart disease. Metabolism, 42, 177-184.

Snow-Harter, C., Going, S., & Pamenter, R. (1995). Effects of resistance training on regional and total bone mineral density in premenopausal women: a randomized prospective study. Journal of Bone Mineral Research, 10, 1015-1024.

Stone, M. H., Fleck, S. J., Triplett, N. T., & Kramer, W. J. (1991). Health- and performance-related potential of resistance training. Sports Medicine, 11, 210-231.

Tremblay, A., Despres, J.-P., & Bouchard, C. (1985). The effects of exercise training on energy balance and adipose tissue morphology and metabolism. Sports Medicine, 2(223-233).

Tremblay, A., Fontaine, E., & Nadeau, A. (1985). Contribution of postexercise increment in glucose storage to variations in glucose-induced thermogenesis in endurance athletes. Canadian Journal of Physiological Pharmacology, 63, 1165-1169.

Van Zant, R. S. (1992). Influence of diet and exercise on energy expenditure-a review. International Journal of Sport Nutrition, 2, 1-19.

Vuori, I. (1995). Exercise and physical health: Musculoskeletal health and functional capabilities. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 66, 276-285.

Wagner, E. H., & Lacroix, A. Z. (1992). Effects of physical activity on health status in older adults I: Observational studies. Annual Review of Public Health, 13, 451-468.

Young, D. R., & Steinhard, M. A. (1995). The importance of physical fitness for the reduction of coronary artery disease risk factors. Sports Medicine, 19, 303-310.

Here's another article by Dr. Len Kravitz on the topic. It's a good summary of the previous one with an attempt to evaluate the winner in the debate.

GO LONG OR GET STRONG?

Men's Health; Nov99, Vol. 14 Issue 9, p102

Some of us run. The rest of us grunt. So which is better: endurance or weights? We put them in the ring and let them slug it out

EVERYONE KNOWS which type of exercise he prefers--aerobics or strength training. But which is better? Exercise scientists split the difference, saying that everyone should do some of both. But we're not satisfied with that answer. Cochampions? Come on! Ali and Frazier never agreed to share anything! We want a winner. So we sent them into the ring for a 10-round physiological grudge match to see which form of exercise does more for physical well-being.

And you've earned a ringside seat.

For the scoring, we used pro boxing's 10-point-must system. That means the winner of a round gets 10 points. If the round ends in a draw, each contestant receives 10. A score of 10 to 8 is a blowout--the poor sap with the 8 got pummeled. Ten to 9 means it was close.

ROUND 1

Bone Strength Both forms of exercise help your bones stay healthy and strong, but the increases are site specific. If you run, your lower-body bones stay strong, but you don't do anything to beef up the bones above the waist. Total-body weight training strengthens all bones.

* Cardio Guy: 8

* Muscle Man: 10

ROUND 2

Blood Pressure. Here's where inexperience becomes a factor in this fight. The few studies on the effect of resistance training on blood pressure contradict one another. Aerobics, though, clearly heads off the in crease in blood pressure that's common as we grow older.

* Cardio Guy: 10

* Muscle Man: 8

ROUND 3

Resting Heart. Rate This is a crucial indicator of fitness. Fewer beats per minute means your heart is stronger, pumping more blood with each contraction. Studies on resistance training swing wildly, from no effect on resting heart rate to an 11 percent reduction; in general, it probably won't do much to slow your heart rate. Aerobic exercise may produce reductions of up to 25 percent.

* Cardio Guy: 10

* Muscle Man: 9

ROUND 4

Blood Lipids. Here's where the battle swings in favor of cardiovascular exercise. Only really strenuous weight-lifting programs (tough exercises, heavy weights, lots of sets and repetitions) seem to lower total cholesterol and triglycerides and increase HDL cholesterol (the good stuff). But aerobic exercise does all these heart-saving things at any intensity. Even for the guy with the blue headband and matching wrist wraps.

* Cardio Guy: 10

* Muscle Man: 8

ROUND 5

Glucose Metabolism. When a body can't process insulin and blood glucose properly--usually due to obesity--blood sugar goes up and diabetes can result. Both weight lifting and aerobics have been shown to improve insulin sensitivity and reduce overall insulin levels. But the nod definitely has to go to aerobic exercise because it uses more calories and increases the clearance of glucose from the blood.

* Cardio Guy: 10

* Muscle Man: 8

ROUND 6

Cardiorespiratory Fitness. A knockdown! The skinny challenger is starting to pile up points. Of course aerobic exercise increases aerobic fitness. Weight lifting, with rests of a minute or 2 between sets, doesn't (except for circuit weight training, when performed with very little rest between exercises). Improvements in cardiorespiratory endurance have been linked to increased longevity, so there's every chance that Cardio Guy will outlast his opponent.

* Cardio Guy: 10

* Muscle Man: 8

ROUND 7

Resting Metabolic Rate. The muscle mass you add through strength training increases the rate at which you burn calories throughout the day. That means less body fat. For aerobic exercise, the evidence is less clear. Some studies have shown that aerobic exercise boosts metabolism, particularly among elite distance athletes; other studies haven't.

* Cardio Guy: 8

* Muscle Man: 10

ROUND 8

Strength. Young, old, healthy, frail--all can see dramatic increases in strength from resistance training. Aerobics? The only strong thing about runners is the smell coming from the gym bag.

* Cardio Guy: 8

* Muscle Man: 10

ROUND 9

Functional Capabilities. Which type of exercise helps your body maintain its abilities as it ages? Both. And both, when combined, can improve lower-back health. Going into our final round, aerobic exercise is up by three points. It'll take a knockout for strength training to claim the crown.

* Cardio Guy: 10

* Muscle Man: 10

ROUND 10

Longevity. It all comes down to this: Who's more likely to go the distance? A recent study of 18,000 men 45 or older found that the aerobically fittest men outlived the least aerobically fit by almost 9 years. Guys who were only moderately fit had a 6-year edge. So if all you do is lift weights, chances are that Cardio Guy is going to outlive you. Worse, he'll be around to marry your widow and spend your life-insurance payoff.

But do we have a knockout? Nope, because no one knows if there's a direct link between resistance training and longevity. It needs more study. Muscle Man has taken a pounding in this round, but he's still standing as the bell sounds.

* Cardio Guy: 10

* Muscle Man: 8

* The Winner? Little surprise: Cardio Guy remains champion. But Muscle Man put up a respectable fight, and in a few years, when we've learned more about the health benefits of muscle building, he may even be able to claim the title. If you want the longest, healthiest, most active life possible, do both types of exercise. Meanwhile, if you prefer cardiovascular exercise to weight training, you're allowed a small, superior smirk. Don't get too cocky, though. You may be on track to live longer than Muscle Man, but he can still snap you like a twig. And when was the last time a woman admired the size of your heart muscle?

Lenny Kravitz?

Voice of Ray-san wrote:

Lenny Kravitz?

"The adverse physiological side effects of an intense workout session cannot be understanded.

And, I've been working on a new riff...check this out!"

My biggest problem with any of Alan's statements is he is throwing out there the fact runners don't do enough of everything else.

Have you ever been to a gym? 90% of the weight lifters have no set routine, they just walk around and look at the "cool machines" and try them out. After trying them out with 5 or 6 tries, they walk around for another 5 minutes looking to try other machines. It is sad really. While runners, though we may not try different approaches, we do it consistently. We do it routinely. And most of us don't do it to loose weight or anything like that, it is because we enjoy it. The health benefits are like a bonus.

So I work at a running store and had a prospective employee stop in today. She works at a gym and told me that she's having an argument with a personal trainer about this very subject. Basically, he says she doesn't need to run high mileage in order to run fast times. She told him that's nonsense, but doesn't have any studies handy to knock him down (apparently he'll only listen to the science behind it). So, after reading this thread about overall fitness, I'm more curious about high level running fitness, and how high mileage affects the body, from a strictly scientific standpoint. Any studies, books, things of that nature would be appreciated because she has to win.

I just want to say that Alan won this thread decisively.

I just want to say that I don't think any of these guys know as much about the human body as they think they do... and I'm no science dummy! It's all very intricate and I don't think the mechanisms we have figured out are even close to the whole story. Chemical transportation and cellular biology are a fraction of how the body really works. We don't even know half the processes of the brain, and you know, the brain, it's pretty important.

All the evidence I really need is that I am fitter than your average American, feel better, and will almost certainly live longer (or at least have my mobility longer). It's already been proven that runners, in general have significantly longer lifespans than the average person.

lefty from donny brasco wrote:

Saw this on a site for people who excercise because they want to look pretty:

Have fun with the whole virginity thing