Boring backstory:
My partner and I are members of Lifetime Fitness (a local chain of gyms that are expanding slowly around the country). 3-4 times a week, one or both of us take a class that’s either cardio or cardio/weights. All of the classes end with abs work on the floor and then stretching…well, they did. One of the instructors for the cardio-kickboxing was told that if he did abs work again, that he’d be fired. The guy has a good following and the support of the class, but the reason given was that the class offered enough ab work from the moves so it didn’t need to have this extra at the end.
So, we called up to the national office over in Phoenix who gave the mandate to change the policy. The head of the fitness department stated that this was because of the recent news that sit-ups/crunches are bad for you and lead to a curvature of the spine.
Most of what I’ve heard about these exercises is that they build core strength which helps support the spine. Is this something new or is it, well, bs?
This is just like the whole eggs/butter/coffee thing:
One day they’re horrible, horrible foods that should be avoided at all costs. The next, they’re being toted as miracle foods that will solve all your problems. Which you never would have had if you hadn’t switched to their alternatives.
I’ve never heard this particular argument against crunches, i.e. that they’re bad for your spine.
I have, however, heard it repeated over and over: crunches are not to be used in isolation. I think the concern is that people will just get down and work on their 6-pack using crunches, while neglecting work on their obliques and complementary exercises for their back. I’ve noticed a huge shift in the past few years towards “core training” which focuses on the entire area, rather than just the main abs.
Nonetheless, I think most people don’t get enough ab work. Stopping crunches rather than integrating other core work seems like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
IMHO (I’m not a Dr., personal trainer, et al)., there are exercises that do a better job of targeting the abs then situps (which tend to involve the hip flexors, also), but that is a far cry from saying that situps are dangerous.
Curving the spine? I can see how doing lots of ab work, without any exercises for the lower back, can create a muscle imbalance. But causing bone damage?! That sounds ludicrous to me.
I’ve heard they’re bad for women, somehow reproductively. This is believed mainly by Army women who don’t like situps. I think it’s one of those things that is both good and bad but it’s best to just stick w/ the one you prefer to be true.
I mean, really, any exercise can hurt you if you do it too hard for too long too many times, right?
As a personal trainer with a six pack, it IS possible to overtrain abs but I have never seen this in a person who wasn’t a professional athlete or an athlete of Olympic style calibur.
I work in various gyms as and train my own clients. Remember health clubs sell DREAMS not fitness. This is why almost all their personal trainers are out of shape.
Abs are actually among the easiest muscles to get. The issue is getting rid of the fat over them to see them. This is why people don’t realize the key to a six pack is running.
As for crunches being bad, anything done incorrectly is bad. As I said, a person going to the gym for two hours a week, even five days a week is simply not working hard enough to overtrain. So unless they are totally screwing up a crunch or have a bad back to begin with that fitness guy is wrong.
I work with several physicians and they actually give me lower back exercises that USE crunches to help strengthen a lower back.
Just a couple of thoughts from information I have heard, no cite, sorry…
Situps are not detrimental unless, like any other exercise, you do it to exclusion without balancing the opposing and supporting groups
Situps work the psoas and iliopsoas (hip flexors) more than anything else, so there’s not much point in doing them for a good-looking midriff (as mentioned previously fat loss is what is really needed there)
This is just a personal gripe but I am sick of every group fitness class including some kind of ab work. I do not need an instructor’s help to do situps and crunches, I can do those on my own. I think too many instructors are using these activities as padding for whatever reason, maybe they aren’t competent in the main activity, or maybe these suburban housewives don’t think they’ve had a workout unless there’s a crunch somewhere in it.
I would not be surprised if it were these factors that led to the decision more than whether situps actually were bad or not.
I imagine the instructor’s thought process is something like this:
“These people are in a fitness class instead of just working out on their own, therefore at least part of the reason they are here is because they need external motivation. If they need external motivation, they are probably not doing situps and crunches on their own. I need to put situps and crunches in my routine, because strengthening the core is very important, as is hitting every muscle group since this may be the only exercise these people do until the next class.”
I mean, I understand where you’re coming from, Brain Wreck — I just don’t think you can assume that other people are as motivated as you to do daily situps and crunches.
I don’t want to hijack another person’s thread, but I’d like to welcome you, LtnJck, and ask if you would consider an “Ask the personal trainer” thread. I have lots of questions, as (I suppose) do others on this post. It would be a great way to ingratiate yourself to the Dope (or, you could just post a picture of a cat and pretend it’s yours).
Well, maybe, if it’s a class like “Body Toners” or “Cardio Funk” or “Latin Pilates” or whatever general fitness class. These are for people who benefit from group motivation or enjoy a bit of socializing. Fine for them, sometimes I enjoy that too. But there are some classes targeted at a specific modality that really needs to be instructor-led. Ergo, I think time in-class should be spent on that specific modality. It’s like if they tried to teach remedial algebra in physics… you’re supposed to review that on your own if you’re rusty.
I guess I am a little sour because our excellent yoga instructor was replaced with someone with a very different style. Previous one managed to make it physically intense yet fluid and spiritual workout involving the entire body. Current one appears to be shooting for Housewife Belly-Busters 101.
Most of what I’ve heard about these exercises is that they build core strength which helps support the spine. Is this something new or is it, well, bs?