The Ohio University Study on CrossFit

raw_meal

Move on to beating your kids if you have any.

So you decide to come to MFP to combat the anti-CrossFit negativity...........

And you hope to accomplish this by not only posting unscientific BS "studies" that you tout as proof of how awesome CrossFit is, but also by calling established, intelligent members voicing valid criticisms of your posts child abusers.

Given your actions, it's far more likely you're extremely anti-CrossFit and are deliberately attempting to make CrossFit supporters look bad.

Seriously, not really here to defend CF, been here off and on for years. Just started CF in June. I never realize the massive negativity on CF until I actually started reading the forum posts. I was like what WTF.

Again this report has negative results against CF as well as good. If it was pro CF then negativity would be left out. It has positive things to say also.

The control aspect.
Just through the study out for information. Initially I was thinking if it is worthy it will stand up. There's no control unless you believe prior HIIT study results count for a control for HIIT. The devil is in the details. Did you read the supporting studies in the report? I did not. So yeah I do not know. If prior studies do not count tell me why? Educate me on why a prior study does not count and is bad assumption or instead just attack me on the forum. See my other posts on HIIT vs HIPT study assumptions.

Yes I responded to comment that pissed me off in between work and checking the site.

Please provide rationale on HIIT assumptions for previous studies and why it can not be used as a control or results to bounce against?

No_Finish_Line

If the "study" had been done at the University of Michigan, we could buy it. It was, howeve,r done at Ohio State so it is total garbage



OSU SUCKS!!!!

this critique has the most merit IMO lol

QuietBloom

Move on to beating your kids if you have any.

I hereby dub thee 'CrossFit Troll'.

PikaKnight

Why must you post this crap EVERY SINGLE DAY?

This is why so much of the fitness community downs crossfit. It is not that we do not like crossfit, it is that we do not like 90% of crossfitters who have the constant compulsive need to be validated that what they are doing is considered a workout to everyone else.

This is exactly why crossfitters experience so much "hate." Most of you are like the digital jehovah witness' of the fitness community. Don't you have enough fully dedicated CF websites to spew useless studies about obvious general observations with working out? Or is this like a mating call you use for other crossfitters to see so you can all come in a thread and begin the buttloving?

Right! This is like the crossfit version of Minnie/Lichten

QuietBloom

Move on to beating your kids if you have any.

So you decide to come to MFP to combat the anti-CrossFit negativity...........

And you hope to accomplish this by not only posting unscientific BS "studies" that you tout as proof of how awesome CrossFit is, but also by calling established, intelligent members voicing valid criticisms of your posts child abusers.

Given your actions, it's far more likely you're extremely anti-CrossFit and are deliberately attempting to make CrossFit supporters look bad.

Seriously, not really here to defend CF, been here off and on for years. Just started CF in June. I never realize the massive negativity on CF until I actually started reading the forum posts. I was like what WTF.

Again this report has negative results against CF as well as good. If it was pro CF then negativity would be left out. It has positive things to say also.

The control aspect.
Just through the study out for information. Initially I was thinking if it is worthy it will stand up. There's no control unless you believe prior HIIT study results count for a control for HIIT. The devil is in the details. Did you read the supporting studies in the report? I did not. So yeah I do not know. If prior studies do not count tell me why? Educate me on why a prior study does not count and is bad assumption or instead just attack me on the forum. See my other posts on HIIT vs HIPT study assumptions.

Yes I responded to comment that pissed me off in between work and checking the site.

Please provide rationale on HIIT assumptions for previous studies and why it can not be used as a control or results to bounce against?

For something to be a control it has to be done in parallel to the test group(s).

Acg67

Move on to beating your kids if you have any.

So you decide to come to MFP to combat the anti-CrossFit negativity...........

And you hope to accomplish this by not only posting unscientific BS "studies" that you tout as proof of how awesome CrossFit is, but also by calling established, intelligent members voicing valid criticisms of your posts child abusers.

Given your actions, it's far more likely you're extremely anti-CrossFit and are deliberately attempting to make CrossFit supporters look bad.

Seriously, not really here to defend CF, been here off and on for years. Just started CF in June. I never realize the massive negativity on CF until I actually started reading the forum posts. I was like what WTF.

Again this report has negative results against CF as well as good. If it was pro CF then negativity would be left out. It has positive things to say also.

The control aspect.
Just through the study out for information. Initially I was thinking if it is worthy it will stand up. There's no control unless you believe prior HIIT study results count for a control for HIIT. The devil is in the details. Did you read the supporting studies in the report? I did not. So yeah I do not know. If prior studies do not count tell me why? Educate me on why a prior study does not count and is bad assumption or instead just attack me on the forum. See my other posts on HIIT vs HIPT study assumptions.

Yes I responded to comment that pissed me off in between work and checking the site.

Please provide rationale on HIIT assumptions for previous studies and why it can not be used as a control or results to bounce against?

I don't think you understand what a control is

bmqbonnie

I have no dog in this fight. I like the principles that crossfit is built on- cross training, total and functional fitness, a community aspect. I would probably do it myself if I lived in an area where it was offered (and I could afford it).

However, the "study" is so embarrassingly bad that the student that made it ought to be kicked out of his or her program. No control, a small sample where a significant amount dropped out, not published (and nor would it ever be, it would never make it past peer review) and it's not really comparing crossfit TO anything, and it clearly shows some bias of the author striving to basically say, "yeah brah crossfit's great". It just has an abstract thrown on it to make it sound really official.

Again, like someone else said: not anti CF, I'm anti bad study being touted as being significant.

jonnythan

Please provide rationale on HIIT assumptions for previous studies and why it can not be used as a control or results to bounce against?

Look, it's obvious that you have no real education in or understanding of experimental design or statistical analysis. Just.... drop it.

No_Finish_Line

For something to be a control it has to be done in parallel to the test group(s).

ideally the control would be identical to the test group in ever way except for the varible your trying to test, in this case HIPT.

Sadly (i guess lol), that can never really be achieved with human subjects, but the closer the better.

No_Finish_Line

Please provide rationale on HIIT assumptions for previous studies and why it can not be used as a control or results to bounce against?

Look, it's obvious that you have no real education in or understanding of experimental design or statistical analysis. Just.... drop it.

its wrothwhile to use in a discussion but would be pointless to apply statistical analysis between the two groups because the designs were competely different.

ElliottTN

Why must you post this crap EVERY SINGLE DAY?

This is why so much of the fitness community downs crossfit. It is not that we do not like crossfit, it is that we do not like 90% of crossfitters who have the constant compulsive need to be validated that what they are doing is considered a workout to everyone else.

This is exactly why crossfitters experience so much "hate." Most of you are like the digital jehovah witness' of the fitness community. Don't you have enough fully dedicated CF websites to spew useless studies about obvious general observations with working out? Or is this like a mating call you use for other crossfitters to see so you can all come in a thread and begin the buttloving?

It's information if you don't like it don't read it. You know all this stuff already so move on. I posted it because I see negativity on CF. So I put it up for others. Not you. Go post I lift weights all day because you have time. I won't read it.

That is the thing. I come in, see something labeled crossfit so and so and think, "you know what, maybe today might be the day! Maybe today something is posted that isn't completely laughable, I shall click on this link." Then I see your avatar and my heart instantly drops as I know there is maybe only 5% chance in hell that you might possibly post something of real value other than "working out helps your fitness, crossfit number 1!" Then I browse and realize that the 5% chance I give you needs to be re-adjusted down to maybe 1% just because I do not believe anything is impossible.

AND

You see so much negativity towards crossfit because people like you make these threads like this. I honestly feel bad for the crossfit population that does want to be taken seriously or has something USEFUL to post.

Thanks for your pity I appreciate it and you have it all wrong. Again info. There is negative facts on crossfit in the study. It's just a study get over it. Crossfit is bad for you. It cost too much. People who do it are losers and can't work out on their own. Got the message. Move on to beating your kids if you have any.

OP,
Child abuse is a very real and horrible thing impacting countless victims everyday. Although you may feel this is a appropriate medium to express off color humor, I assure you that it is not. I really believe it is time to educate yourself on the horrible effects of child abuse and remove it from any future attempts to insult others. Further I honestly believe you owe the current and future patrons of this thread a apology for your insensitive use of this terrible crime.

KristinNicole82

." Most of you are like the digital jehovah witness' of the fitness community.

OMG I am using this.

lorinmgreen

I went to a cross-fit style trainer and was hurting myself often. I hurt my knee first, then my elbow, then shoulder. I know it gets results, but only if you don't hurt yourself . This is from my personal experience, I didn't read the whole study and from other comments it sounds like his/her methods are flawed. Some of these "boxes" are not run by real trainers, or people with any other knowledge than some cross-fit training classes.

I am all for working out, I know I need to do it and do it more consistently, but I was waying 200 dollars a month to hurt myself trying to keep up. Now I do a HIIT kickboxing class with a very focused trainer, and turbo fire at home. I am seeing some good changes and have yet to get an injury

That being said, if you belong to a great trainer who wants to push you in this way and your body can handle it...well then go for it. Some people in my group got amazing results.

SoLongAndThanksForAllTheFish

Why must you post this crap EVERY SINGLE DAY?

This is why so much of the fitness community downs crossfit. It is not that we do not like crossfit, it is that we do not like 90% of crossfitters who have the constant compulsive need to be validated that what they are doing is considered a workout to everyone else.

This is exactly why crossfitters experience so much "hate." Most of you are like the digital jehovah witness' of the fitness community. Don't you have enough fully dedicated CF websites to spew useless studies about obvious general observations with working out? Or is this like a mating call you use for other crossfitters to see so you can all come in a thread and begin the buttloving?

It's information if you don't like it don't read it. You know all this stuff already so move on. I posted it because I see negativity on CF. So I put it up for others. Not you. Go post I lift weights all day because you have time. I won't read it.

That is the thing. I come in, see something labeled crossfit so and so and think, "you know what, maybe today might be the day! Maybe today something is posted that isn't completely laughable, I shall click on this link." Then I see your avatar and my heart instantly drops as I know there is maybe only 5% chance in hell that you might possibly post something of real value other than "working out helps your fitness, crossfit number 1!" Then I browse and realize that the 5% chance I give you needs to be re-adjusted down to maybe 1% just because I do not believe anything is impossible.

AND

You see so much negativity towards crossfit because people like you make these threads like this. I honestly feel bad for the crossfit population that does want to be taken seriously or has something USEFUL to post.

Thanks for your pity I appreciate it and you have it all wrong. Again info. There is negative facts on crossfit in the study. It's just a study get over it. Crossfit is bad for you. It cost too much. People who do it are losers and can't work out on their own. Got the message. Move on to beating your kids if you have any.

Seriously, you need to put every argument pro and con out of your mind for a minute and think about this. If you post advertising for ANYTHING that disguises itself as a "study", you will generate negative responses because its: 1)false, 2)dishonest, and 3)annoying. Would you like a lot more pop-up ads in your reading? I had nothing against Crossfit if you like it and have a good coach and are careful not to overtrain and it works for you, thats absolutely awesome! But from your false "studies" alone I'm getting a very very negative view of Crossfit. Logically, it must have some very strong negatives to obscure if they do so many pretend studies like this, and something to prove if all it can manage to do is spend money for falseness...somethings got to be very wrong with it. Is that really what you want to point out? You did for me.

No_Finish_Line

i've never been to a crossfit gym, but to me it seems like and incredibly advanced form of exercise.

seems to me that it would be exceptionally more dangerous for beginners.

I would imagine that having a good prior knowledge of what you can and can't get away with form, weight, and overal exertion wise might go a long way in preventing injury.

i guess what i'm saying is that i wouldn't go in there any place my health solely in the hands of a stranger just becuase he's a CF coach (or whatever they call them). and it would seem like a beginner is doing just that.

Mr_Knight

Drop out rate was BECAUSE OF INJURY. 11 people from the original group quit … 2 because of time and the other 9 because of some sort of injury. If 16% of people in a type of exercise sustain some sort of injury, that sounds risky. (The article did also bring up possible risk/gain concerns).

So the only thing is article actually ends up demonstrating is that CrossFit is dangerous.

Cool.

msf74

What case? Just put it out there. The experts on the forum have spoken. The study is crap. You assume too much.

I wouldn't say it's crap. The findings on absolute oxygen uptake are intriguing.

The problem is the design of the study and how it seems to have been conducted which means it has limited scope. It seems like this isn't the only place where there is controversy about it...

http://journal.crossfit.com/2013/05/acsm.tpl

cmay89

I consider myself an avid advocate for Crossfit. But these studies are bunk! They are as biased as the ones proclaiming all Crossfitters will encounter Rhabdo should they continue headlong down the path to hell that is called Crossfit.

I let myself be the example. I learned early on not to push Crossfit onto people who don't like it/want to hear about it anymore/just don't care either way. Much like my faith. I'll tell you it is what I believe and what I do and if you like the way it sounds I can go into greater detail. But it's studies like this that give fodder to the great hate towards Crossfit and it's participants. I can rattle off my favorite Games participants and their stats and what workouts over the years of the Games have been the best etc etc, but very very few people actually want to hear it.

I do believe that Crossfit is infinitely scalable to just about any age/fitness level IF (and this is a gigantic IF) the coach is intent on preaching correct form before progressing. What hurts Crossfit so much are the coaches who are in it for the glory, who don't care as long as they find that super athlete who can be the promotion that they want their gym to get. It's the jumping headfirst into everything that gets people hurt; it's the lack of personal responsibility to say when they truly should go no further and rest for a while; it's the moving to a new, more complex movement before you have the basics down to where you can do them in your sleep

I totally get why people hate Crossfitters in the fitness community. And it saddens me. I truly do love Crossfit and all of the doors it has opened for me and I hate to see people tear it down. But just because they do, doesn't mean that I will belittle the programs they choose or tout Crossfit as the end-all be-all. People will only truly succeed in fitness if they find joy in what they do to make themselves healthier. Either that or they have a will power that is unrivaled to do something that they do not like day in and day out.


...


just my two cents...

raw_meal

Why must you post this crap EVERY SINGLE DAY?

This is why so much of the fitness community downs crossfit. It is not that we do not like crossfit, it is that we do not like 90% of crossfitters who have the constant compulsive need to be validated that what they are doing is considered a workout to everyone else.

This is exactly why crossfitters experience so much "hate." Most of you are like the digital jehovah witness' of the fitness community. Don't you have enough fully dedicated CF websites to spew useless studies about obvious general observations with working out? Or is this like a mating call you use for other crossfitters to see so you can all come in a thread and begin the buttloving?

It's information if you don't like it don't read it. You know all this stuff already so move on. I posted it because I see negativity on CF. So I put it up for others. Not you. Go post I lift weights all day because you have time. I won't read it.

That is the thing. I come in, see something labeled crossfit so and so and think, "you know what, maybe today might be the day! Maybe today something is posted that isn't completely laughable, I shall click on this link." Then I see your avatar and my heart instantly drops as I know there is maybe only 5% chance in hell that you might possibly post something of real value other than "working out helps your fitness, crossfit number 1!" Then I browse and realize that the 5% chance I give you needs to be re-adjusted down to maybe 1% just because I do not believe anything is impossible.

AND

You see so much negativity towards crossfit because people like you make these threads like this. I honestly feel bad for the crossfit population that does want to be taken seriously or has something USEFUL to post.

Thanks for your pity I appreciate it and you have it all wrong. Again info. There is negative facts on crossfit in the study. It's just a study get over it. Crossfit is bad for you. It cost too much. People who do it are losers and can't work out on their own. Got the message. Move on to beating your kids if you have any.

OP,
Child abuse is a very real and horrible thing impacting countless victims everyday. Although you may feel this is a appropriate medium to express off color humor, I assure you that it is not. I really believe it is time to educate yourself on the horrible effects of child abuse and remove it from any future attempts to insult others. Further I honestly believe you owe the current and future patrons of this thread a apology for your insensitive use of this terrible crime.

Sorry. Agree.

GiddyupTim

Drop out rate was BECAUSE OF INJURY. 11 people from the original group quit … 2 because of time and the other 9 because of some sort of injury. If 16% of people in a type of exercise sustain some sort of injury, that sounds risky. (The article did also bring up possible risk/gain concerns).

So the only thing is article actually ends up demonstrating is that CrossFit is dangerous.

Cool.

I just have to say that it seems a bit contradictory for so many to criticize this study for failing to have a control group, and yet nobody challenges these statements about Crossfit having a high injury rate. How do you know without a control group?
Is 16 percent of participants in a demanding physical program sustaining an injury over 10 weeks really a high rate? Sure, you're not going to injure yourself on an exercise bike. But, what if you compared it with people at a soccer camp? Or tennis? Or running 6 miles, or 8 miles, or 10 miles an outing. Or, just simply lifting weights using a 5x5 program?
Perhaps if those people missed one day of training because of injury they were excluded from the data. That might mean these were pretty minor injuries. We don't know.
I hear these statements that Crossfit is dangerous, but I have yet to see any credible statistics on it or any kind of rigorous comparison of Crossfit injuries to injuries in some other comparable activity.
Don't they say that somewhere between 40 percent and 60 percent of runners sustain some kind of injury every year, and that anywhere from 30 percent to 90 percent of those injuries lead to a reduction in training?
Man, that makes jogging sound really hazardous! And yet, my 74-year-old mother-in-law does it.

Mr_Knight

I just have to say that it seems a bit contradictory for so many to criticize this study for failing to have a control group, and yet nobody challenges these statements about Crossfit having a high injury rate. How do you know without a control group?

Relax, it was a joke.

raw_meal

Why must you post this crap EVERY SINGLE DAY?

This is why so much of the fitness community downs crossfit. It is not that we do not like crossfit, it is that we do not like 90% of crossfitters who have the constant compulsive need to be validated that what they are doing is considered a workout to everyone else.

This is exactly why crossfitters experience so much "hate." Most of you are like the digital jehovah witness' of the fitness community. Don't you have enough fully dedicated CF websites to spew useless studies about obvious general observations with working out? Or is this like a mating call you use for other crossfitters to see so you can all come in a thread and begin the buttloving?

It's information if you don't like it don't read it. You know all this stuff already so move on. I posted it because I see negativity on CF. So I put it up for others. Not you. Go post I lift weights all day because you have time. I won't read it.

That is the thing. I come in, see something labeled crossfit so and so and think, "you know what, maybe today might be the day! Maybe today something is posted that isn't completely laughable, I shall click on this link." Then I see your avatar and my heart instantly drops as I know there is maybe only 5% chance in hell that you might possibly post something of real value other than "working out helps your fitness, crossfit number 1!" Then I browse and realize that the 5% chance I give you needs to be re-adjusted down to maybe 1% just because I do not believe anything is impossible.

AND

You see so much negativity towards crossfit because people like you make these threads like this. I honestly feel bad for the crossfit population that does want to be taken seriously or has something USEFUL to post.

Thanks for your pity I appreciate it and you have it all wrong. Again info. There is negative facts on crossfit in the study. It's just a study get over it. Crossfit is bad for you. It cost too much. People who do it are losers and can't work out on their own. Got the message. Move on to beating your kids if you have any.

Seriously, you need to put every argument pro and con out of your mind for a minute and think about this. If you post advertising for ANYTHING that disguises itself as a "study", you will generate negative responses because its: 1)false, 2)dishonest, and 3)annoying. Would you like a lot more pop-up ads in your reading? I had nothing against Crossfit if you like it and have a good coach and are careful not to overtrain and it works for you, thats absolutely awesome! But from your false "studies" alone I'm getting a very very negative view of Crossfit. Logically, it must have some very strong negatives to obscure if they do so many pretend studies like this, and something to prove if all it can manage to do is spend money for falseness...somethings got to be very wrong with it. Is that really what you want to point out? You did for me.

Good point and I am sorry you feel that way about CF. Look at any other thread with CF in it, you may feel the same about CF base on the discussions there. It's the same theme.
But we are in a forum, where things are discussed, isn't this the purpose of a forum? I could have blindly went on my merry way and thought this was a good study and promulgated it further, as well as others who ran into it. I threw it up for discussion. By the way my Gym owner brought up the one yesterday. I saw the article and threw up here.

Is it better to assume it's correct and not post or post to see what falls out? Am I wrong about posting it in forum? I don't have any other place to check this. I got killed yesterday for a post and today for a post. If I really did the research on the article it would take me a long time (free time) for me to assess and still not know that the study was flawed without a background these types of research. I don't regret posting it. I do regret my one comment.

So here we are in a forum discussing it. Should we have a censor for posting here? This place appears to be self censoring.

jonnythan

Good point and I am sorry you feel that way about CF. Look at any other thread with CF in it, you may feel the same about CF base on the discussions there. It's the same theme.
But we are in a forum, where things are discussed, isn't this the purpose of a forum? I could have blindly went on my merry way and thought this was a good study and promulgated it further, as well as others who ran into it. I threw it up for discussion. By the way my Gym owner brought up the one yesterday. I saw the article and threw up here.

Is it better to assume it's correct and not post or post to see what falls out? Am I wrong about posting it in forum? I don't have any other place to check this. I got killed yesterday for a post and today for a post. If I really did the research on the article it would take me a long time (free time) for me to assess and still not know that the study was flawed without a background these types of research. I don't regret posting it. I do regret my one comment.

So here we are in a forum discussing it. Should we have a censor for posting here? This place appears to be self censoring.

Serious suggestion: instead of posting a link to an article and saying "CrossFit comes out on top" or whatever, post a link to the article and say "does this study make any sense?"

Then - and here's the most important part - when you get a dozen people pointing out valid criticisms of the study, say "I understand your criticisms and now see that the article doesn't really say much" instead of defending it.

GiddyupTim

I don't think he was defending the study. He was just closely questioning your assessments, in order to better explore them. That's a pretty valid response.
Why do you think he should just accept your opinion without putting it to a test?

Docpremie

I don't know anything about crossfit, so I have no dog in this fight. I also agree that the "dropout rate" was very high. They are also missing the diet factor, which could have changed things drastically on it's own. Would it have been nice to see a "non-treated group," absolutely! Is the study ideal, far from it!

That said, studies are designed all the time with the "pre" values being used for the control & the "post" value serving as the change in result. You can have a subject serve as its own control with "change in treatment." It looks to me, as if that is what was done here. In medical studies for drugs & other treatments, subjects can serve as their own control. For example, a new antihypertensive medication is tried, the BP pre-med can serve as the "control" for treatment effect of the med. Ideally studies are done in "blinded, randomized fashion," however those types of studies are getting harder & harder to fund & carry out.

Edit: I just googled to find the original study & they did indeed use the subjects as their own controls. The measurement of % body fat was also done in an acceptable manner. The pre & post results were analyzed by a 2-tailed, paired t-test, which is appropriate. The also broke the test subjects out into group according to their "pre test" numbers & used a linear regression model to study changes, since their where large differences in their pre-test fitness. I thought the study results looked pretty clean, as their wasn't any overlap when "standard deviations" were thrown in; however in looking at the actual paper. they used "stander error" instead of standard deviation. The standard error is a quick trick to make the data look better & more clean than standard deviation, so the results aren't nearly as clean as they appear in the graphs.

raw_meal

Good point and I am sorry you feel that way about CF. Look at any other thread with CF in it, you may feel the same about CF base on the discussions there. It's the same theme.
But we are in a forum, where things are discussed, isn't this the purpose of a forum? I could have blindly went on my merry way and thought this was a good study and promulgated it further, as well as others who ran into it. I threw it up for discussion. By the way my Gym owner brought up the one yesterday. I saw the article and threw up here.

Is it better to assume it's correct and not post or post to see what falls out? Am I wrong about posting it in forum? I don't have any other place to check this. I got killed yesterday for a post and today for a post. If I really did the research on the article it would take me a long time (free time) for me to assess and still not know that the study was flawed without a background these types of research. I don't regret posting it. I do regret my one comment.

So here we are in a forum discussing it. Should we have a censor for posting here? This place appears to be self censoring.

Serious suggestion: instead of posting a link to an article and saying "CrossFit comes out on top" or whatever, post a link to the article and say "does this study make any sense?"

Then - and here's the most important part - when you get a dozen people pointing out valid criticisms of the study, say "I understand your criticisms and now see that the article doesn't really say much" instead of defending it.

The thread is: TOPIC: The Ohio University Study on CrossFit

issyfit

The thread is: TOPIC: The Ohio University Study on CrossFit

In case you missed my earlier post--it should be Ohio State University. Ohio University is a different school in a different city.

links_slayer

The thread is: TOPIC: The Ohio University Study on CrossFit

In case you missed my earlier post--it should be Ohio State University. Ohio University is a different school in a different city.

there should also be " " around the word Study.