Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You do realize that the first article that you posted said the same thing Bosco did?
I don't understand the argument. "Light", in this context, means any weight that won't challenge you. I don't know any woman who can't lift 5 pound dumbbells. Hell, some purses weigh more than that. If you are just starting out, squatting your bodyweight or lifting 20 pound dumbbells may be too much. That is "heavy" for you. No one is advocating injury, but many women can lift much more than they think they can.
Well it had a bit of variation to facts and clarification on details. "Light" is just an opinion but the article gave you a way to figure out what is "light" for each individual. I agree though that some people don't know how to figure out what is light and what is heavy for them. The article gives you a method to try out and find your personal specific needs. They need to learn what is a true challenge, just what exercise feels like and the danger zone that could injure you.
The other article gave you options of methods to try for your workout based on your final goal. Showing that lighter is the way to go for tucking and heavy for serious building along with rest period guidance.
His attitude is fine. I am a woman, and I agree with him. "Light" weights that do not challenge you IS a waste of time. Why go to the gym if you aren't going to challenge yourself? As stan4 so eloquently stated, women do not get huge by lifting heavy unless they are juicing.
Can we make this a sticky?
I lift weights and I get it. However you can do lighter weights with more reps. The weight still has to exhaust you but it does not have to be a struggle. I tore my rotator cuff, not weight related and my rehab was lifting light weights to strengthen my shoulder. I thought it would be pointless, but it really helped. I deferred to my PT who is an expert in the field.
I never go to the gym without challenging myself. But some women are intimidated by gyms and the notion of lifting heavy weights. My point was the statement of lifting light weights is a wasted of time is counter productive to getting people in the door and doing workouts. Any resistance body movement is productive. I am trying to look at the big picture for everyone.
Yes, because as I pointed out, you will be gaining muscle mass and losing fat, the two ways you develop tone.
It's clear that some people are not understanding what I'm saying. When thinking of "light" weights, you must view it in the scope of the person lifting the weight. For instance, to someone like me, a 200lb bench press is "light" while it will be more than some people will ever do. The bottom line is that if someone is lifting weight that is "light" to them, they are doing nothing but a wasting their time with a half assed aerobic workout.
If your body fat is low enough natural tone shows through if you are active. That is what I mean by that. Low body fat can be achieved with more diet control and less working out. (or vice versa as you stated) But when you workout a lot vs. dietary control method the body tends to just be bigger and more muscular because it takes a lot of work to cancel out those cals and any extra ones go into muscle building and fat. You generally have more nutritional support for your muscles too which can leave them bigger. (may be your goal but I did not have the same. My "good" level is not gym chick like pictured) I agree that using the word "light" is just too general a term to guide people in what does what. Its why I linked that stuff.
Last edited by Opsimathia; 11-20-2011 at 02:19 PM..
You don't burn off muscle from exercise. I would say a good combination would be 75% cardio, 25% weight lifting. Muscles help burn calories so it's important to implement that into any weight loss routine. Just don't go into extremes and start lifting too heavy like Staci did, otherwise you might get discouraged when you gain weight from the muscles.
That's why I'm so adament about losing the weight first. Mentality has everything to do with weight loss and exercise. Once people see progress and start losing the pounds, they are more likely to continue a healthy lifestyle. Whether they choose to add on muscles like Staci did, is a decision that's much easier when they're already in the zone of exercise.
Yes you do. Most people lose about 20% muscle to 80% fat when they lose weight. You can try to combat this with strength training.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stan4
To all the silly women who are still convinced they will somehow turn into towering hulks of muscle, let me tell you...I have been TRYING to get that look for years. I have been lifting heavy for years. I even have an endocrine overproduction of DHEA that makes me stronger than most women. But I cannot and have not 'bulked up' like women are afraid will happen. Unless you use supplements like steroids, etc, (which I would never do) you just can't do it. Even lots of men can't get very big...which is why so many of them juice.
This can radically improve if not save your life. Don't sacrifice you health for some deluded sense of vanity.
Its not silly because there are variations. Just because you can't do it, doesn't mean someone else can't or that the level of desired muscle goals are different.
Some men get naturally bigger than others. It happens in women too. Knowing the proper level of training for your desired outcome is not sacrificing anything.
Women should do something for resistance to strengthen and for bone density. But that does not require extreme levels of lifting heavy. Its just like how there are all variations to achieve cardio health. you can walk, run swim...whatever gets your heartbeat up. But the different exercise level have different details to go by to achieve health.
I just think this is one of those things that is hard to discuss because of generalized terms like: light etc.
Its not a true solid value but an opinion. Same thing with : "bulky"
Last edited by Opsimathia; 11-20-2011 at 02:17 PM..
I lift weights and I get it. However you can do lighter weights with more reps. The weight still has to exhaust you but it does not have to be a struggle.
Then you are not lifting "light" weights. You are lifting moderate weight, having traded weight for reps. This a perfectly fine method, and I've done it myself.
I don't get it though - when I do some leg exercises, like the hip/thigh abductor for instance, I generally go for a bit of a lighter weight - something that requires moderate effort, for those machines it's around 110-120 lbs - and do a lot of reps, like 15-20. I can REALLY feel the muscles burning when I do that, and they tend to be really sore the next day too - how can that still be useless?
I feel like i naturally have 'bulkier' muscle in my legs that builds up fairly easily, yet is covered with a layer of fat so definition doesn't show through - so I really don't want to build them up more with really heavy weights since they would just look bigger. A lot of female athletes, not just bodybuilders but some swimmers, even some gymnasts, have fairly bulky legs which is not a look I like. I really want to "lean" them out and make them smaller, but maybe that's just not meant to be given my build?
Also, what about just inaerobic exercise, like sit-ups, lunges, etc? Don't they help with 'toning' even though there are no weights involved?
I've also seen plenty of girls/women who have nice definition showing in their abs, legs, etc. - yet have never stepped foot in a gym, never mind lift barbells.
It's just naturally how their body/muscle tone is. My MIL is 55 and has nicer, more toned looking legs that I probably ever will and she does NO working out whatsoever. Sigh.
Then you are not lifting "light" weights. You are lifting moderate weight, having traded weight for reps. This a perfectly fine method, and I've done it myself.
I am not talking about myself. I do lift as heavy as I can go. I was just speaking generally.
I don't get it though - when I do some leg exercises, like the hip/thigh abductor for instance, I generally go for a bit of a lighter weight - something that requires moderate effort, for those machines it's around 110-120 lbs - and do a lot of reps, like 15-20. I can REALLY feel the muscles burning when I do that, and they tend to be really sore the next day too - how can that still be useless?
It's not. Moderate weight, high rep exercises have their place.
But a big part of successful weight loss is exercise. So waiting to lose the weight before is counterproductive. Diet and exercise need to go together in order to achieve a successful outcome.
Cardio doesn't burn muscle?
Its the dieting part of a weight loss program that burns muscle?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
and she does NO working out whatsoever. Sigh.
