Why don’t you lift weights?

Reading the trainer’s schtick is a bit frustrating. There is really no need to (incorrectly) devalue steady state cardio in promotion of strength balance and HIIT, and he thereby ignores the risks of overtraining with strength and HIIT every day. Strength training some adds huge value to quality of life and both life and health expectancy … AND endurance work also does, both together with larger volume of time, if you spend the larger volumes on endurance, leading to the greatest benefits. Too much HIIT can shortchange recovery.

Meanwhile a meta analysis, mostly middle aged to older women, demonstrating again that a little strength training goes a long way.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?start=10&q=strength+training+2023&hl=en&as_sdt=0,14#d=gs_qabs&t=1688911901244&u=%23p%3DbqLJXIEkyiwJ

Just one set of each major group …

One frustration with any reporting of nutrition or exercise are the (1) tendencies to oversimplify the information and (2) to insist whatever is the only and best way.

Interval training is efficient. However, as you correctly say, it does not have quite all the benefits of steady state exercise (especially endurance) and can be as arduous as working out for strength or power. The biggest benefits from strength training come from becoming strong and not just going through the motions. As we know, a mix of modalities is probably better.

Gawd media misleading or simply incorrect reporting!

Here’s a new one, not strength training related but excuse the digression:

Specifically it states the following:

The study in fact shows NOTHING OF THE SORT!

The study:

In short old news. BMI 25.1 to 30, “overweight” is a mixed bag including from the very fit and a few mildly over fat. In some past studies the lowest mortality was in the low side of that group. But get closer to 30 and over and bad outcomes/mortality risk increase. Significantly in this study.

Even less irresponsible reporting mostly ignores the fact that this study confirms further the risks associated with obesity as defined by BMI.

Younger adults more often saw increased risk within overweight and older could be a little bit obese and not have much increased risk.

BMI alone is a tool of limited utility for the individual, but article like this would have me pulling out my hair if I had any left!

This is the results:

The risk of all-cause mortality was similar across a wide range of BMI categories: compared to BMI of 22.5–24.9 kg/m2, the adjusted HR was 0.95 [95% CI 0.92, 0.98] for BMI of 25.0–27.4 and 0.93 [0.90, 0.96] for BMI of 27.5–29.9. These results persisted after restriction to healthy never-smokers and exclusion of subjects who died within the first two years of follow-up. A 21–108% increased mortality risk was seen for BMI ≥30. Older adults showed no significant increase in mortality between BMI of 22.5 and 34.9, while in younger adults this lack of increase was limited to the BMI range of 22.5 to 27.4.

While i agree that an article that somehow translated this into “obesity is a-okay” is simply wrong, i get annoyed at the amount of pressure there is to maintain a BMI under 25. And this study, like several other studies, shows that the data don’t support that. At least, not for health outcomes. If you are mostly concerned that other people look attractive, then sure, nag the people who are overweight.

There is a huge amount of prejudice against those who are overweight. It’s probably worse for women than for men. But I’ve had friends with BMIs in the “perfectly fine from a life expectancy perspective” range who had doctors basically refuse to treat them due to their weight, or hassle them endlessly about their weight. So my annoyance is mostly the other way.

(To give you my perspective, I’m an old lady with a BMI around 29 who is thinking it might be good for my knees to shed a few pounds, but with BP, cholesterol, and blood sugar all pretty good.)

I’ll reemphasize: BMI has limited utility for individuals, especially in the so called “overweight” category. Many who are “overweight” are not meaningfully over fat. Many who strength train will, for example, be so categorized. Those obese by BMI usually do have excess fat, but some more than others. How much of the mass is muscle, how much is fat, and where the fat is all matter. Waist circumference so on.

Different population studies through the years have had different BMI points as the on average best association with lowest mortality rate, some have been 25 to 26, others a bit lower.

But the point is not to digress into the actual utility of BMI and how it is misused and misunderstood. It’s more reactive to media mishandling and misreporting health information.

FWIW my personal take is to use BMI as a population metric and a screening tool but to pay attention to the habits and choices of people as what matters most. The scale may or may not follow, usually does, but health much more likely will.

Sure. I just get a lot more annoyed by the constant and inappropriate drumroll of “you must be slim” than by the less common “being fat doesn’t matter”. Both are almost always a misreading of whatever study they are theoretically based on.

Illustrating the point made:

Sorry to multi post but specific to this: I would argue that being fat matters less than the habits do. Given to bet on who will more likely have the longer healthspan I’ll take the person with a BMI of 30 to 35 who moderately strength trains and does a good amount of cardio with some decent nutrition plan, over the one with a BMI of 22 who does none of those things. Now odds are doing those things will correlate with a BMI under 30 but even if it did not.

I’ve commented previously, and for some reason I’ve had trouble keeping up with all the posts. If I don’t just page down to the end it keeps refreshing around 100 spots up. Anyway…

I mostly just wanted to add my recent experiences with my body/health and (mostly irregular) lifting. Honestly, vanity is part of it. I guess at least if you consider wanting to look good vain. I am around 45 and I can say without a doubt I am at my peak in body/looks “for my age,” and I’d say I probably look better than I did from 25-35 when I was fairly sedentary. All my bloodwork is great. I had a hernia a few years back and my surgeon encouraged me to walk right away, do stairs, etc. I’ve also had some issues with digestion, pelvic pain, and sciatica. When I make time to strength train all these issues seem to go away. I’ve read some of the posts on BMI, if you can be fit but fat and so on. Aesthetics do mean a lot to me, but even when I was fatter (mostly in my early-mid 20s; seemed to be in a "perma-bulk) and lifted my overall health was better than when I seemed to manage my weight through diet and walking alone. In fact a few years back I lost weight pretty much due to a job that used around 3500-4000 calories a day and just eating a fairly typical diet. I lost weight but I was maybe in “skinny fat” territory. late last year a co-worker remarked that I “got bigger but thinner at the same time.” As I was getting dressed for work today I noticed that my arms looked bigger and harder than they had at anytime since my late teens, and a lot of my lifetime “problem areas” (lower back, upper thigh, underarm fat) have tightened up a lot. I’ve noticed a lot of people making comments lately that getting fat is just part of aging, but that’s a no go for me. I want to live a long time and have experiences that a lot of people just take for granted as being part of a young person’s experience but haven’t really been part of my life. I don’t see any reason to “give up.” So I’ll keep doing things I think will help, and honestly I DO enjoy working out. Also, in case I didn’t mention it, I pretty must just use dumbbells, a pullup bar, and very light weights on a barbell. Sometimes I go to a park with some equipment but far from a gym. I’ll probably never get into the Starting Srength type routine but I also never want to drink a gallon of milk a day or bulk up solely for the purpose of lifting more weight.

On the subject of BMI… I am fat by any measure. My understanding of the current research is that there is no evidence-based intervention for long-term weight loss. I also understand that a major factor in weight gain appears to be caloric restriction/weight cycling. I am not just talking about crash dieting, I am talking about any kind of caloric restriction or “healthy lifestyle” change or whatever the diet industry is calling it these days. Eating Disorders 101 will teach you that caloric restriction leads to binging and you can’t really treat something like binge eating disorder without ending the caloric restriction. As someone who tried on and off for most of my life to lose weight, and was down to a very muscular 150 at my lowest weight, to then go up to my highest weight in the year following a miscarriage, I can definitely see the trajectory between attempted weight loss and steady weight gain throughout the course of my life.

My best understanding of the research is that long-term weight loss isn’t a realistic goal for most people, but lifestyle behaviors, particularly regular exercise, can dramatically reduce one’s all-cause mortality regardless of size. This is where I am, working on the habits that will contribute to my overall health and prevent future weight gain. I am currently exercising about 2-3 times a week. My goal is to boost that up to most days per week. I vary what type of exercise I do according to my mood. I recently started introducing strength training again, at a lower weight than I think I can handle because I injured myself last year doing too much (a common problem for me. I tend to go hard in workouts.)

For some of us, this is the best we get. As far as I know all my health markers are fine. I have had high cholesterol in the past but it seems to go back and forth, my last blood test was fine. But my Aunt, who suffers from an eating disorder, was recently diagnosed with Type II Diabetes so I am well aware there is a genetic factor to watch out for. (Incidentally she has dropped a ton of weight since starting her diabetes medication and I’m not sure whether to be happy for her or concerned.)

The relationship between women’s weight, misogyny, the diet industry, body image, depression, stress, trauma etc. is hard to unpack. There’s an excellent podcast called Maintenance Phase which is doing some of this work. I don’t usually pull this card but I’ve been through more shit in my lifetime than some can comprehend. It is amazing that I am alive, professionally successful, a good parent to a special needs child, and reasonably happy at 40. I have learned that exercise is critical to maintaining some semblance of sanity. It doesn’t always work, but it helps. And medication helps. And good nutrition helps. And time away from screens helps. It all adds up.

There has be a path to health that isn’t influenced by someone trying to make a fast buck, or shaming women for not conforming to men’s ideal body standard. I think for women like me you kind of have to get over it, the whole fucking fascist mess of fatphobia, and approach health on your own terms, not the terms imposed by society or what you “should” be doing according to the sanctimonious thin people, but what actually works for you and your quality of life.

Just my 2c.

My BMI is close to my waist size. It has been discredited as a very approximate measure. Metabolic health and ability to exercise are usually more important than weight. However, it is worth having some measure since excess weight is associated with things like joint pain and other things.

So some doctors tout a simple test - measure your circumference at the belly button. If you are twice as tall as round, you likely have little intra-abdominal adiposity. There are recommended levels by gender.

It is true gyms have often been perceived as rough places that did not always put all clients at ease or encourage the elderly people who most benefit from them. Weightlifting is not difficult, although there is much to know to know it well. But most people with gym memberships don’t do it. There is nothing, of course, wrong with classes or treadmills. However, this seems to be improving.

The best reason to exercise is health, improving things at a cellular level and not just ephemeral appearances. Even a little goes a long way. Pat yourself in the back if doing moderate exercise three times a week. Eighty percent or more of people do not reach this modest milestone.

I will argue that for the vast majority of us that is the best that can be.

The focus on the number on the scale (and thereby BMI) fairly often is of more harm to health over time than good. Focus on the habits (ideally including some strength training but even if not) and fat loss, and especially the most hazardous, central/visceral, fat loss will happen. Likely 10% of body weight. Might BMI still be over 30? Who cares? The lion’s share of health benefits are achieved. People feel better.

Some alternatives to lifting weights.

A popular article suggesting exercise may be the most important thing you can do. Avoiding smoking and binge drinking and opioids, managing stress and relationships, eating and sleeping better are also healthy habits.

Not about strength training but more on how even just incorporating small bouts of vigorous activity into daily living has significant benefits, lowering cancer risks dramatically.

A popular media plain English discussion of the article:

I don’t doubt exercise and good nutrition both lower the risk of chronic disease and cancer. But it isn’t the easiest thing to study. Still, more good reasons to do it.

This study might interest some people. It suggests that having a high BMI does not much matter if one has a high level of fitness, at least with regards to heart failure. (Should be a free article below the abstract.)

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ejhf.1433

Of course fewer of the obese had high cardiorespiratory fitness.

To highlight though:

Going to low from lowest is HUGE.

@Dr_Paprika -

What is your take on the ideal place for isometrics as part of a balanced program (not as part of rehab)? Assuming all is fun.