# Advice: Strength training for weight loss **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [October 14, 2008, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/advice-strength-training-for-weight-loss/467885 "2008-10-14T15:50:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Brandon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/f08c70/32.png) [@Brandon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brandon)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2008, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/advice-strength-training-for-weight-loss/467885/61 "2008-10-18T17:33:05Z")
> [@Brandon](#): > > It’s hard to see in the image, but it doesn’t like you will be doing squats completely free so that may be something to note. Christ. I meant to say, “It’s hard to see in the image, but it looks like you will be doing squats completely free, so that may be something to note.” > [@Sleel](#): > > Actually, I’d agree with you that high intensity interval training is probably better than the traditional aerobics sweet spot. In fact, I’ve linked to [this study](http://jap.physiology.org/cgi/content/full/98/6/1985) in explaining the benefits of intensity in training on this board before. That paragraph was just to include a very brief set of recommendations for a pure beginner. While the core weightlifting exercises will never be outgrown, I expect that in a few months she’ll be fit enough to move into HIIT or at least incorporate sprint days. Not right at the start though. Probably should have included that point in my original post. Thank you for the link to the study, I’ll have to scope it. Glad to see we are in agreement about HIIT (including the fact that she should not be doing it initially). ---
**Author:** ![Fantome](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9c0ed/32.png) [@Fantome](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fantome)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2008, 4:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/advice-strength-training-for-weight-loss/467885/62 "2008-11-20T04:44:14Z")
> [@ultrafilter](#): > > Anything over about eight reps per set is of limited value from a strength/size standpoint, although that doesn’t mean that it’s not occasionally worthwhile, as I’ll explain below. Is this a relatively recent change in what’s been the recommendation for years? I haven’t kept up with what the muscle mags have been saying lately, but in all the years I’ve read M&F and the like, the recommended rep range for maximal growth has been in the 8-12 range. ---
**Author:** ![ultrafilter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/3d9bf3/32.png) [@ultrafilter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ultrafilter)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2008, 4:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/advice-strength-training-for-weight-loss/467885/63 "2008-11-20T04:45:58Z")
> [@Fantome](#): > > Is this a relatively recent change in what’s been the recommendation for years? I haven’t kept up with what the muscle mags have been saying lately, but in all the years I’ve read M&F and the like, the recommended rep range for maximal growth has been in the 8-12 range. Most of what the muscle mags print can be politely described as fiction. ---
**Author:** ![Fantome](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9c0ed/32.png) [@Fantome](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fantome)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2008, 4:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/advice-strength-training-for-weight-loss/467885/64 "2008-11-20T04:54:00Z")
> [@ultrafilter](#): > > Most of what the muscle mags print can be politely described as fiction. Sure, they’re not exactly scientific journals, but they seem to be a good source of anecdotal info for what has worked for bodybuilders. What’s the alternative? Where did you get the info that “anything over about eight reps per set is of limited value from a strength/size standpoint?” ---
**Author:** ![ultrafilter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/3d9bf3/32.png) [@ultrafilter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ultrafilter)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2008, 5:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/advice-strength-training-for-weight-loss/467885/65 "2008-11-20T05:05:38Z")
I don’t think I can even point to a single source. Somewhere on [T-Nation](http://www.t-nation.com) you’ll find discussion that is scientifically-based. ---
**Author:** ![Fantome](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9c0ed/32.png) [@Fantome](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fantome)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2008, 5:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/advice-strength-training-for-weight-loss/467885/66 "2008-11-20T05:21:33Z")
> [@ultrafilter](#): > > I don’t think I can even point to a single source. Somewhere on [T-Nation](http://www.t-nation.com) you’ll find discussion that is scientifically-based. I don’t know **ultrafilter** , I’ve spent a lot of years in gyms in my younger days and almost everyone I know that would be described as “built”, has put plenty of muscle on with the belief that at least 8 reps was optimal for putting on mass. I’m not sure what you meant by “limited value”, but if you meant anything close to “almost useless”, I can’t agree in the least. I’m familiar with T-Nation. You’re under the impression that mags like M&F can be described as fiction but T-Nation isn’t? M&F also reports on weight lifting studies that are “scientifically-based”; I don’t see why you believe the info from T-Nation is to be any more believable than M&F. ---
**Author:** ![Brandon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/f08c70/32.png) [@Brandon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brandon)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2008, 1:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/advice-strength-training-for-weight-loss/467885/67 "2008-11-21T13:18:03Z")
> [@Fantome](#): > > I don’t know **ultrafilter** , I’ve spent a lot of years in gyms in my younger days and almost everyone I know that would be described as “built”, has put plenty of muscle on with the belief that at least 8 reps was optimal for putting on mass. The line of logic behind 8 reps being the upper limit is that if you can do too many reps in one set, you aren’t lifting enough to really make a difference. There is some flexibility, but if your primary goal is mass then I agree with **ultrafilter**. > [@](#): > > I’m familiar with T-Nation. You’re under the impression that mags like M&F can be described as fiction but T-Nation isn’t? M&F also reports on weight lifting studies that are “scientifically-based”; I don’t see why you believe the info from T-Nation is to be any more believable than M&F. As a general rule, I’d go with T-Nation over M&F. The biggest point of contention with T-Nation is that they do heavily push products they sell online (I believe they freely admit that); but if you take all that with a grain of salt, their articles normally have more substance. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/advice-strength-training-for-weight-loss/467885.md?page=3)