Why so many trainers suck

Options
2»

Replies

  • fiddletime
    fiddletime Posts: 1,862 Member
    Options
    Azdak wrote: »
    rileyes wrote: »
    DavPul wrote: »
    rileyes wrote: »
    Could strength training (SL5x5-type) be considered HIT? I don't look at it as cardio. But HIT maybe? --All out effort then rest...

    Not even close. There is an old joke in lifting that when you need to do some cardio just lift weights faster. But a joke is all it is.

    The weights would have to be lighter to lift faster. And I know that's not cardio. ;)

    I find that achieving a true HIT (heart rate levels) is hard to achieve. But I thought @Azdak may be able to explain how strength training could or could not be considered HIT.

    The heart rate response to heavy strength training is driven by completely different physiological factors than when doing cardio. So while the actual number is the same, what's happening in the body is different.

    During cardio, the increased heart rate is due to a volume load-- the heart pumps faster and harder to pump more blood; cardiac output (and thus VO2) increase.

    During heavy strength training, heart rate increases due to a pressure load. The heart has to pump faster to overcome intrathoracic pressure and peripheral resistance. Even though heart rate increases, cardiac output and VO2 only increase by a modest amount. So there is not the same "cardio training" taking place.

    Monkeying around with your strength workout (eg working with less rest between sets) significantly decreases the quality of your strength workout without really increasing the cardio component.

    Now you can do "cardio" training using weight lifting movements. However, in order to achieve a cardio training effect, you must lower the resistance to the point where you are getting much less strength training benefit.

    As always, it comes down to designing a problem around your specific abilities and goals. But you (or the trainer) has to have a clear idea of what type of exercise does what and not just lump it all together.

    Thanks for writing this summary explanation. I think many of us on here appreciate it.
  • rileysowner
    rileysowner Posts: 8,241 Member
    Options
    Just quickly scanned through. I notice many have accreditation from the same organizations. Makes me think there is a definite lack in the training.
  • kcjchang
    kcjchang Posts: 709 Member
    Options
    Just because someone is accredited doesn't make them more knowledgeable, especially when that accreditation doesn't meet academic rigor. Forensic science comes to mind with the exception of genetics which hails from a different path.

    Does recent research points to electrons spilling out of cell walls as the cause for burning sensation and major cause of fatigue as opposed to lactic acid buildup? Just because one is a harbinger doesn't make it the culprit.
  • ebbingfat
    ebbingfat Posts: 117 Member
    edited August 2015
    Options
    I am generally distrustful of personal trainers. I know there are good ones out there, but I've heard so many horror stories too.

    My boyfriend got a free personal training session at our gym when we first signed up. At the time he was recovering from a serious back injury, but had finally got permission from his doctor to start working out again - with certain limitations in place. Going into the personal training session, my boyfriend very clearly explained this to the trainer and told him exactly what his weight limitations were. Throughout the session the trainer kept trying to get my boyfriend to lift more, or do things that his doctor specifically told him not to do. Whenever my boyfriend told the trainer no, the trainer lectured him about how "he would never make progress if he didn't push himself".

    On top of that, a friend of mine has been having issues with her knees for the last month now after a session with her trainer where he kept pushing her to do something that she told him didn't feel right.

Categories