Not into weight lifting. Is it really necessary at all?

PikaKnight

Other examples I think of are ice skaters, swimmers, gymnasts.

You don't think they lift? I know for a fact swimmers do, and I bet dollars to donuts the others do as well.

I know for a fact all three above, including ballerinas and tennis players, do strength training.

Stage14

No, you do not have to lift barbells, dumbbells, or use RT machines if you do not want to.

There is absolutely no reason why you need to lift *A* weight to strength train.

You do have to lift weight, but it can be your own, or you can use bands for RT. I'm not sure why some people in this thread are telling you that you can not maintain muscle/bone density unless you literally lift some external weight.

Is a squat, or a press-up not strength training? A lunge? a pull-up? Aren't they some of the best?

Sure, those are all great. But it takes a heck of a lot more squats and lunges at bodyweight to get the same benefits as 5-12 with added free weights. I don't think anyone is saying that OP HAS to lift weights specifically, but lifting free weights is often the quickest and most effective way to get the benefits she is looking at, like preserving muscle mass and increasing bone density.

If she's happier doing a few hours a week of bodyweight exercises, then awesome, go for it! But if it's a matter of "I hate all of these options" then weight lifting will at least be the shortest workout times for the same payoff.

ironanimal

It's not necessary, no, but a progressive, taxing resistance exercise regime is.

rybo

No, you do not have to lift barbells, dumbbells, or use RT machines if you do not want to.

There is absolutely no reason why you need to lift *A* weight to strength train.

You do have to lift weight, but it can be your own, or you can use bands for RT. I'm not sure why some people in this thread are telling you that you can not maintain muscle/bone density unless you literally lift some external weight.

Is a squat, or a press-up not strength training? A lunge? a pull-up? Aren't they some of the best?

Sure, those are all great. But it takes a heck of a lot more squats and lunges at bodyweight to get the same benefits as 5-12 with added free weights. I don't think anyone is saying that OP HAS to lift weights specifically, but lifting free weights is often the quickest and most effective way to get the benefits she is looking at, like preserving muscle mass and increasing bone density.

If she's happier doing a few hours a week of bodyweight exercises, then awesome, go for it! But if it's a matter of "I hate all of these options" then weight lifting will at least be the shortest workout times for the same payoff.

There are ways to make body weight exercises difficult enough where one would have trouble squeezing out 5-8 reps for a given movement so one is not any faster than the other, or more effective or more efficient for building strength & muscle.

ajaxe432

Other examples I think of are ice skaters, swimmers, gymnasts.

You don't think they lift? I know for a fact swimmers do, and I bet dollars to donuts the others do as well.

Swimmers, I don't know. Probably depends. I used to ice skate. Back then, no they didn't. Ballet was encouraged to supplement. No one ever used to weight lift. Now, I don't know. But they had the same muscles back then.

Also, my husband doesn't lift but has really muscular legs from years of playing soccer. That is muscle memory cause he does nothing now. But they are still rock hard. Go figure. :-/

I'm thinking that your definition of muscular and others here may be quite different. E. G. Every soccer player I've seen has chicken legs

I don't think "chicken legs" is the right term for it. Have you ever seen their quads? The lower leg may be small, but that is certainly not true for the quad area.

Akimajuktuq

Bodyweight exercises. Easy, done at home with limited props. Probably won't make you Hercules, but will improve strength if you keep making your routine more challenging as you go. Yes, being strong matters. I'm in my early 40s and feel it's of utmost importance, and yes, I am just starting out but have always been quite strong (cuz I always find reasons to lift heavy things on occasion). My mom at 59 has lost weight but has no strength. She is injured very easily. A little fall and she's in for surgery to repair the damage. Get strong.

MireyGal76

I do not lift heavy.

I box. Which is a form of strength training in the sense that you meet resistance when you hit the bag...

but my gains came from caloric deficit, body weight exercises, and only very very recently (i.e. the last few workouts), some work with 15 pound dumbbells. oh and the odd 5 mile run thrown in for good measure.


OP, you don't HAVE to do anything you don't want to do.

contingencyplan

You can get muscular and get the results you're talking about with bodyweight training alone, yes. However you have to be willing to take that training a lot farther than what bodyweight training and yoga go into. You have to look more closely at what gymnasts do for their training to get ideas of how to take bodyweight training to THAT level.

EDIT:

The bottom line is that many people, including yourself, have goals that can only be accomplished by really stepping up the intensity of their training to something that can truly be called high intensity training. The forms of Yoga and Pilates which are generally marketed to the public do not take it to this level of intensity and, as such, should only be regarded as supplemental training. There are studios out there that teach the higher intensity forms needed to produce these results, but they are rare, expensive, and practicing these forms alone in the privacy of your own home without a licensed instructor present is neither safe nor practical unless you are at a very advanced level already.

PikaKnight

Also wanted to throw out that what people tend to call "muscular" is more reliant on the person's body fat % versus strength/lifting.

da_bears10089

Anybody that thinks that professional athletes don't do some form of weight lifting is in denial

contingencyplan

Anybody that thinks that professional athletes don't do some form of weight lifting is in denial

This is true. Most professional dancers, including ballerinas, do weightlifting as a part of their training.

RGv2

Other examples I think of are ice skaters, swimmers, gymnasts.

You don't think they lift? I know for a fact swimmers do, and I bet dollars to donuts the others do as well.

Swimmers, I don't know. Probably depends. I used to ice skate. Back then, no they didn't. Ballet was encouraged to supplement. No one ever used to weight lift. Now, I don't know. But they had the same muscles back then.

Also, my husband doesn't lift but has really muscular legs from years of playing soccer. That is muscle memory cause he does nothing now. But they are still rock hard. Go figure. :-/

I'm thinking that your definition of muscular and others here may be quite different. E. G. Every soccer player I've seen has chicken legs

I don't think "chicken legs" is the right term for it. Have you ever seen their quads? The lower leg may be small, but that is certainly not true for the quad area.

That comes from strength training, BTW.

Stage14

No, you do not have to lift barbells, dumbbells, or use RT machines if you do not want to.

There is absolutely no reason why you need to lift *A* weight to strength train.

You do have to lift weight, but it can be your own, or you can use bands for RT. I'm not sure why some people in this thread are telling you that you can not maintain muscle/bone density unless you literally lift some external weight.

Is a squat, or a press-up not strength training? A lunge? a pull-up? Aren't they some of the best?

Sure, those are all great. But it takes a heck of a lot more squats and lunges at bodyweight to get the same benefits as 5-12 with added free weights. I don't think anyone is saying that OP HAS to lift weights specifically, but lifting free weights is often the quickest and most effective way to get the benefits she is looking at, like preserving muscle mass and increasing bone density.

If she's happier doing a few hours a week of bodyweight exercises, then awesome, go for it! But if it's a matter of "I hate all of these options" then weight lifting will at least be the shortest workout times for the same payoff.

There are ways to make body weight exercises difficult enough where one would have trouble squeezing out 5-8 reps for a given movement so one is not any faster than the other, or more effective or more efficient for building strength & muscle.

Of course there are. Again, I'm not saying lifting weights is necessary at all, just that it increases efficiency. A Bulgarian split squat is going to be more challenging than a traditional squat. But a Bulgarian done with weights is still always going to be more challenging than a Bulgarian split squat done with just body weight.

mustgetmuscles1

"Weightlifting" is not necessary but I think some form of strength/resistance training IS necessary to be strong and healthy. Like others have said: Strength, bone density, muscle retention (while dieting and as we get older) a little higher metabolic rate.

Being stronger is amazingly useful in day to day life. *caution wife bragging ahead* My wife has been lifting with me for two years now. She is not really any bigger than she started out, in fact she has lost weight, but is much stronger.

You can go from a gallon of milk being heavy to carrying in all the groceries at once in a short time. She recently helped me carry a very heavy cooler to the truck when I went hunting. I was really surprised with how strong she has become.

Playing with our girls at the park and she lifted our daughters (youngest is 36 lbs) up to the bar like it was no big deal. Being a strong role model for them is also pretty awesome.

jofjltncb6

I just realized...

...that my IQ probably isn't high enough to participate in this discussion.


Out.

Yanicka1

I see little old ladies with white hair, barely lifting their feets and scared of falling and braking a hip. Their problem is not the fact that they are old, it is the fact that they lost muscle mass. I intend to be a little old lady that walk with vitality, so I do my best to build muscle mass and maintain what I have.

I hate cardio, I still manage to do it because I want to have a healthy cardio-respiratory system.

PikaKnight

I see little old ladies with white hair, barely lifting their feets and scared of falling and braking a hip. Their problem is not the fact that they are old, it is the fact that they lost muscle mass. I intend to be a little old day that walk with vitality, so I do my best to build muscle mass and maintain what I have.

I hate cardio, I still manage to do it because I want to have a healthy cardio-respiratory system.

FrnkLft

Every single professional dancer I know lifts weights, ESPECIALLY the women.

My mother used to dance, and just the other day she was telling me about how her instructors had them lifting weight. She had them doing cleans, actually.

rybo

No, you do not have to lift barbells, dumbbells, or use RT machines if you do not want to.

There is absolutely no reason why you need to lift *A* weight to strength train.

You do have to lift weight, but it can be your own, or you can use bands for RT. I'm not sure why some people in this thread are telling you that you can not maintain muscle/bone density unless you literally lift some external weight.

Is a squat, or a press-up not strength training? A lunge? a pull-up? Aren't they some of the best?

Sure, those are all great. But it takes a heck of a lot more squats and lunges at bodyweight to get the same benefits as 5-12 with added free weights. I don't think anyone is saying that OP HAS to lift weights specifically, but lifting free weights is often the quickest and most effective way to get the benefits she is looking at, like preserving muscle mass and increasing bone density.

If she's happier doing a few hours a week of bodyweight exercises, then awesome, go for it! But if it's a matter of "I hate all of these options" then weight lifting will at least be the shortest workout times for the same payoff.

There are ways to make body weight exercises difficult enough where one would have trouble squeezing out 5-8 reps for a given movement so one is not any faster than the other, or more effective or more efficient for building strength & muscle.

Of course there are. Again, I'm not saying lifting weights is necessary at all, just that it increases efficiency. A Bulgarian split squat is going to be more challenging than a traditional squat. But a Bulgarian done with weights is still always going to be more challenging than a Bulgarian split squat done with just body weight.

Your example is like saying sqatting 250 is more difficult that sqatting 100 lbs. Some people can't squat 100 lbs. Just as some can't do weighted BSS's.
So when a Bulgarian split squat is too easy, move to a skater, then move to a pistol. Then start adding weight. But for the average person (let alone the demographic of the OP) it's pointless to force traditional weight lifting down their throat when body weight moves can accomplish the same thing.

BigGuy47

I think some form of strength/resistance training IS necessary to be strong and healthy. Like others have said: Strength, bone density, muscle retention (while dieting and as we get older) a little higher metabolic rate.

I agree that it is necessary for maintaining overall health as we age. It's less important to many that are under 30. Arriving at 60 years old and realizing that you've lost a ton of muscle is a bad place to be. Better off on trying to save as much as possible while you still have the gas in the tank.