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

htimpaired

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

I can't speak for skaters and gymnasts, but as a former swimmer, we did lift weights. Much of our practice was as much in the weight room as it was the pool. Ya gotta cross train...

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.

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.

No, my example is like saying squatting 50lbs is more physically challenging than squatting 20lbs and assuming the person in question can squat 50lbs safely, they will get results in less time from squatting the 50 over the 20.

I'm not pushing anything down anyone's throat, nor am I saying that results cannot be achieved from body weight alone or that OP even needs to lift. I was replying to a specific post asking why so many posters were promoting lifting over bodyweight alone, and using examples laid out by that poster. That's all.

ash8184

My humble opinion is that if you don't like it, don't do it. There are other ways to achieve similar results. As has been mentioned, have you thought about incorporating just body weight exercises in to your routine? If you do yoga, add in some lunges, squats, push ups, etc. and just using your own body weight will help build/maintain muscle mass. Don't force yourself to do something you aren't going to stick with.

AlongCame_Molly

Let's face it, if you dislike lifting, you're not going to do it, whether we tell you its necessary or not.

I believe strength training is critical to being healthy. It is especially critical for women, as they get older, for bone health (i.e. lifting a heavy load strengthens your bones, not just your muscles).

And just for the sake of keeping it real, those ballerinas you're talking about have been training and eating a certain way for most of their lives. You're not going to get a body like that from a few months of yoga and pilates.

This. Sounds to me like OP just loves arguing, no matter how many good answers she's getting. Shrug.

PikaKnight

My humble opinion is that if you don't like it, don't do it. There are other ways to achieve similar results. As has been mentioned, have you thought about incorporating just body weight exercises in to your routine? If you do yoga, add in some lunges, squats, push ups, etc. and just using your own body weight will help build/maintain muscle mass. Don't force yourself to do something you aren't going to stick with.

There are also power yogas that incorporate dumbbells if you want to incorporate strength training more into something you like.

NoAdditives

First, there is a difference between being really really lean (like the ballerina), and being muscular.

Second, the health benefits of lifting go far beyond just muscles. Strength for daily life, bone density, etc...

Third, strength training is a fairly broad term. Yes, in most cases weights are the most effective form, but there are a lot of good body weight exercises that can be done. I've done some yoga in my day, but I'm certainly no expert. IME, yoga is great for targeting supporting/stabilizing muscles, but doesn't do much to really strengthen the major muscle groups.

I disagree that ballerinas (professional) are really lean, as opposed to really muscular. They are both in my opinion. Their legs are very muscular.

As far as the benefits, yes I agree. I'm just trying to decide if these benefits need to be obtained from traditional weight lifting, or can be obtained from other exercise...which will also build muscle.

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

I think the definition of muscular varies from person to person. However, while professional female ballet dancers have to have lots of strength, they are hardly what most would consider to be muscular. When a person's professional body type demands that their thighs be the same diameter as their calves, the focus is not on muscles, it's on physical appearance only, which is why so many dancers have eating disorders. They can't maintain much muscle while denying themselves a healthy amount of food. Male ballet dancers are an entirely different story, as are gymnasts, figure skaters, etc.

JoRocka

If you did 2 30-45 minute sessions of compound lifting a day- you would be totally set.

Seriously- you do enough for your body as it is- but a little weight training would go a LONG way.

Either do it in the form of HIIT training or do it in the form of true compound lift training- and you would be golden.

You don't need to do ALL the things ALL the time- some of us just like to. You can do yoga/pilates/spin/dance/whatever AND do a little weight training.

I'm a dancer.
I weight lift.
I occasionally do cardio when I want to (I hate cardio)
And I dance- a lot.

But the cardio and lifting needs to be done. And I LOVE lifting- I truly love it- but it's not a priority- so it's hard sometimes for me to want to make time for it. But I do- because it needs to be done.

PikaKnight

If you did 2 30-45 minute sessions of compound lifting a day- you would be totally set.

Seriously- you do enough for your body as it is- but a little weight training would go a LONG way.

Either do it in the form of HIIT training or do it in the form of true compound lift training- and you would be golden.

You don't need to do ALL the things ALL the time- some of us just like to. You can do yoga/pilates/spin/dance/whatever AND do a little weight training.

I'm a dancer.
I weight lift.
I occasionally do cardio when I want to (I hate cardio)
And I dance- a lot.

But the cardio and lifting needs to be done. And I LOVE lifting- I truly love it- but it's not a priority- so it's hard sometimes for me to want to make time for it. But I do- because it needs to be done.

A day? Or did you mean a week?

phjorg1

Resistance training is necessary. You don't have to lift weights to do resistance training though.

deksgrl

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.

If the OP has tried lifting and truly doesn't like it, then I agree. But, average people who never lifted before can learn it and like it, especially when educated about the benefits. Pointing to myself as that average person who never really thought of it as an option, until joining this forum.

contingencyplan

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.

If the OP has tried lifting and truly doesn't like it, then I agree. But, average people who never lifted before can learn it and like it, especially when educated about the benefits. Pointing to myself as that average person who never really thought of it as an option, until joining this forum.

"Traditional" bodyweight moves can not accomplish the same thing. In order to take it beyond the beginner /early intermediate level (which is relatively easy to achieve when you don't have obesity or pre-existing injury working against you), you need to progress to a degree of skills work in your bodyweight training that takes it far beyond traditional, basic bodyweight moves such as pushups, bodyweight squats & lunges, and chinups.

Look at the following exercises: Pistol squats. Handstand pushups. Muscle-ups. Dragon flags. One arm pushups. Suspended ring dips.

Unless you plan on progressing with your bodyweight training to a point where you can perform these exercises, then no. You can not make the claim that bodyweight can replace weights. Because limiting yourself to more rudimentary bodyweight exercises means lack of progressive loading. And progressive loading is key to results.

As you grow stronger you need to find a way to increase the difficulty of the exercise. With weights this is as simple as increasing the weight. With bodyweight, you need to work toward more balance/strength intensive unilateral variations of said exercises. Personally I am a huge proponent of this sort of progression and think that it is arguably superior to weight training. But it's not for everyone and can be FAR more injury prone than conventional weight training when performed by people with ANY pre-existing injury concerns. And no, simply increasing the rep count doesn't cut it.

If you can't find a way of making the work harder as you grow stronger without simply increasing the rep count, then your argument about bodyweight training being sufficient is invalid. And "consumer-oriented" forms of yoga and pilates (the kind being packaged on DVDs and sold to the general public) do not cut the mustard.

Anyway, if you're serious about the idea of using bodyweight training as a complete replacement for weights, I stand by what I said before: Look to gymnasts and how they train. If you have no interest in taking it that far (or close to it) then I've got news for you: You've already proven yourself wrong and don't know it.

deksgrl

If you can't find a way of making the work harder as you grow stronger without simply increasing the rep count, then your argument about bodyweight training being sufficient is invalid. And "consumer-oriented" forms of yoga and pilates do not cut the mustard.

I agree. I wasn't arguing that it was sufficient, just stating that if the OP doesn't like lifting and won't do it, then it's a moot point.

contingencyplan

If you can't find a way of making the work harder as you grow stronger without simply increasing the rep count, then your argument about bodyweight training being sufficient is invalid. And "consumer-oriented" forms of yoga and pilates do not cut the mustard.

I agree. I wasn't arguing that it was sufficient, just stating that if the OP doesn't like lifting and won't do it, then it's a moot point.

True. Sorry, my reply was directed to the person you replied to, NOT you.

Cinflo58

yes it is necessary, expecially for older women to preserve bone mass. You're still young, but as you age you lose muscle and bone mass (espeically white women) and your risk for opsteoposis increases! now go lift something!

Warchortle

If you have no base muscle losing weight will cause you to lose fat and some muscle.. so proportionally you'll look the same, but weigh less.

If you want to change how your body looks like.. get a nicer butt it'll require some lifting. Think about it this way... all that fat is going away.. what's left to take its place? Nothing? Have fun with sagging skin. I'm not trying to push lifting onto anybody, but people really don't understand what resistance training really is and what it offers.

JNick77

I used to lift (lightly) in my 20's. I went around with a man who was really into it, and he taught me how. But I don't think I ever really liked it that much.

As I get older, I've heard it's very important for a woman to do it to maintain muscle. But frankly, I like it even less now. I prefer pilates, yoga, or whatever.

But here is my question that I keep coming back to for those that think it's necessary and the best form of exercise for maintaining muscle. And that it has to be weights, as opposed to using your own body for the exercise, like you do for the most part in pilates (non reformer) and yoga. How do you explain people that don't lift, but are very muscular?

The first example that immediately comes to mind is a ballerina and her legs. They don't lift weights, other than using their body's weight to carry them. My understanding is they do cross train with pilates, yoga, etc., but no weight training. Yet, they are as muscular as can be in their legs.

So, is it really necessary?

It's not necessary by any means. One of the benefits for women is it has positive effect on bone density and this is definitely an issue for women as they get older.

HeyGoRun

How do you explain people that don't lift, but are very muscular?

is that protein yo!

beachgirl172723

You look like you know your way around the weight room. Maybe it's your genetics. If I looked as defined as you do, and I didn't lift, I'd want someone to tell me I needed to lift weights and do body weight exercises to maintain bone health.

LorinaLynn

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.

I have two little old lady neighbors. (Actually, a lot more than two, but these two are a good reference.

One is a chainsmoker who's always outside hunched over hacking up a lung.

One is physically active and I regularly see her loading her and her husband's bags of golf clubs in the trunk of their car. She's spry and has amazing posture. I don't know whether she's ever lifted weights or not, but tossing around those golf bags is certainly a form of resistance training, and when I get old, I'd much rather be like her than Mrs. Lungbutter.

cfinley28

The benefits you get from resistance training only come from resistance training. Cardio will not have the same effect on bone density, insulin sensitivity, and over all health. With that said, it can be something you enjoy. It doesn't have to be weights. As long as you push the muscles to fatigue. That's basically it.