Body Pump vs Lifting. Help!

ninerbuff

like seriously i cant believe that people dont quite get that not all resistance training is strength training. strength training involves consistently overloading your muscle with either more weight or a harder variation if you're doing bodyweight.

maybe there are people in BP who are consistently increasing their weight, but i would think that would be a at a slower pace than in a traditional strength training programs because you are performing the reps at high speed which makes it very easy for you to have crap form

I don't get it because all the sources I linked to including the Harvard Health one and Mayo Clinic use the terms resistance and strength training interchangeably, or they recommend 'strength training' but then go on to include soup cans as tools.

Plus the OP didn't ask how to increase her strength and specifically said she wasn't looking to do that. She just wanted to help her diet along and follow the general recommendation to incorporate some form of lifting.

I'm shocked this is even a controversy, really. It's lifting a barbell in the same motions you do in low rep training. But because it's high rep, it's "not lifting, it's cardio".

Despite that two journals studied this exact question and found the opposite.

Kinesiology 101. Fast twitch, slow twitch activation WILL be determined by the type of training one is doing. BP harbors more on aerobic (slow twitch) training than anaerobic (fast twitch). There's really no debate on this based on reps and weight resistance used in BP. So it's really not a controversy at all, just a misunderstanding of application.

A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

babyphat2012

I love body pump class, and yes its definetely cardio....I burn crazy calories in that class. But to get the most out of weight lifting ou definetely should lift heavier weights with fewer reps. Im doing Body Beast right now. I just started and its not just for men its for women too. You will see a nice lean figure with body beast. If ou want that lan sexy sculpt then body beast is where its at.

JoRocka

When you say "BodyPump is cardio" I think people think that means they may as well spend the time reading a magazine on the elliptical because if they're not willing to design their own barbell routine, they're not doing strength training or doing anything beneficial for their muscles or bones, which is wrong.

We don't all have to work toward hypertrophy or max strength to follow the general health recs to include resistance/strength training.

I don't think anyone thinks it's lazy day cardio. Again you're reading a lot into what we are saying. I do cardio- I do a lot of types of cardio. Cardio does not mean easy. It can be lazy day cardio- but it can sprints- and CrossFit/HIIT wods- all types of cardio- but stuff that'll make you puke.

It just means it's not focused around strength training.

There is no negative connotation to saying that it's cardio- the minor caveot of having to fight this battle of bodypump isn't lifting EVER time it comes up... otherwise no one cares. It's just not strength training.

it's like a Venn diagram. Two circles- and they overlap- cardio and strength training- body pump falls into the over lap shape... depending on how the class is run will determine on where it falls to the cardio or strength over lap side.

edit... for thsi

There's really no debate on this based on reps and weight resistance used in BP. So it's really not a controversy at all, just a misunderstanding of application.

Niner has good words. seriously.

WalkingAlong

Kinesiology 101. Fast twitch, slow twitch activation WILL be determined by the type of training one is doing. BP harbors more on aerobic (slow twitch) training than anaerobic (fast twitch). There's really no debate on this based on reps and weight resistance used in BP. So it's really not a controversy at all, just a misunderstanding of application.

There is apparently enough debate for people to study it, and to find otherwise.

http://www.fpjournal.org.br/painel/arquivos/1972-6_Bodypump_Rev2_2003_Ingles.pdf

Conclusion: Body pump provides a low stimulus to improve aerobic capacity and should not be used as the only method of cardiovascular exercise. It also produces a significant caloric expenditure and may also provide other fitness benefits such as muscular body mass increase and maintenance of body composition.

http://breakingmuscle.com/strength-conditioning/bodypump-group-exercise-does-it-work-or-not
http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr/Abstract/2011/12000/Improvements_in_Metabolic_and_Neuromuscular.26.aspx

"...researchers concluded BodyPump classes were effective at increasing muscular strength and endurance and developing efficiency in movements and muscle activation. Although subjects did indicate metabolic and cardiovascular improvements, these improvements did not translate to actual aerobic fitness."

(Tried to bold parts to make it easier to read, couldn't figure it out, sorry!)

ninerbuff

Kinesiology 101. Fast twitch, slow twitch activation WILL be determined by the type of training one is doing. BP harbors more on aerobic (slow twitch) training than anaerobic (fast twitch). There's really no debate on this based on reps and weight resistance used in BP. So it's really not a controversy at all, just a misunderstanding of application.

There is apparently enough debate for people to study it, and to find otherwise.

http://www.fpjournal.org.br/painel/arquivos/1972-6_Bodypump_Rev2_2003_Ingles.pdf

Conclusion: Body pump provides a low stimulus to improve aerobic capacity and should not be used as the only method of cardiovascular exercise. It also produces a significant caloric expenditure and may also provide other fitness benefits such as muscular body mass increase and maintenance of body composition.

http://breakingmuscle.com/strength-conditioning/bodypump-group-exercise-does-it-work-or-not
http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr/Abstract/2011/12000/Improvements_in_Metabolic_and_Neuromuscular.26.aspx

"...researchers concluded BodyPump classes were effective at increasing muscular strength and endurance and developing efficiency in movements and muscle activation. Although subjects did indicate metabolic and cardiovascular improvements, these improvements did not translate to actual aerobic fitness."

(Tried to bold parts to make it easier to read, couldn't figure it out, sorry!)

All these articles are nice to read, but they still don't address the main point I've made about fast/slow twitch muscle response based on the the type of exercise one is doing. This is STANDARD knowledge amongst any strength/conditioning, physiology, kinesiology, biomechanics, etc. research and study.
So do you agree/disagree with journals of study that reps over 12+ are more slated to use of slow twitch muscles? And if you do agree, then you also should agree that this type of training is more "muscular endurance" focused rather than strength?

A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

BenjaminMFP88

Body Pump isn't purely (or even mainly) cardio, it's resistance/strength, by any definition besides those who think only low rep / high weight qualifies as 'resistance exercise'. Even an elliptical or a bike or swimming have resistance components to them. Just because something gets your heart rate up in parts doesn't mean it's just cardio.

http://breakingmuscle.com/strength-conditioning/bodypump-group-exercise-does-it-work-or-not

"...researchers concluded BodyPump classes were effective at increasing muscular strength and endurance and developing efficiency in movements and muscle activation. Although subjects did indicate metabolic and cardiovascular improvements, these improvements did not translate to actual aerobic fitness."

To add to this,

BodyPump encourages SlowTwitch fibers. If you are newer to lifting, you will gain some strength to a point, however this is predominately beneficial for endurance. Workouts that focus on SlowTwitch fibers are better fueled using oxygen (ATP) so you're more likely to see more fat/calorie burning properties with these workouts. Heavier lifting incites FastTwitch fibers which is a different story.

JonathanLepoff

It would probably be better to use weights or resistance bands to gain strength and definition. It would also be useful to get some advice from an experienced female weight lifter/ body builder

WalkingAlong

So do you agree/disagree with journals of study that reps over 12+ are more slated to use of slow twitch muscles? And if you do agree, then you also should agree that this type of training is more "muscular endurance" focused rather than strength?

I will take your word on that. My issue is just that when people ask if it's a good way to include weights initially because they already do it and enjoy it, I don't think half the forum (having any knowledge of the class or not) should recite, "It's not 'lifting', it's cardio."

Maybe a better response would be more on the lines of, "It can be a good starting point and does have benefits for muscles including endurance and some strength increase initially. But many should eventually consider low rep lifting, especially if maximizing strength or hypertrophy is their goal."

When they see you're a moderator and have that six-line signature (do you paste that in each post?) and regular posters repeat what you say, I think it discourages people from doing the class. Maybe that is your goal, I don't know. I think most of them don't move to the weight floor, I think they're more likely to say "forget it, that's too intimidating so forget weights in my life."

At the gym where you taught, was the class mostly (more than half) slim, under-25 women and overweight, over-60 women like it is here? I think those two groups probably get a lot of benefit from the class and are also the least likely to feel comfortable lifting free weights in a gym on their own. I think the OP here is in the first group, if I recall right.

llamajenn

At the gym where you taught, was the class mostly (more than half) slim, under-25 women and overweight, over-60 women like it is here? I think those two groups probably get a lot of benefit from the class and are also the least likely to feel comfortable lifting free weights in a gym on their own. I think the OP here is in the first group, if I recall right.

This wasn't addressed to me but I'll chime in anyway. I have 3 regular BP classes that I teach each week. The fitness levels and body types are really varied in each class. Many of them enjoy the group exercise format and would be unlikely to be found lifting heavy down in the weight room...using Nautilus/Cybex machines, maybe, but I've also had people tell me that those intimidate them. They find it helpful to have a skilled instructor teaching and giving feedback versus sending them to the weight room to kind of figure it out on their own. I get a huge range in ages (mostly female though) - from teens to 70's(!). All body sizes. My older ladies know their limitations, modify where needed (I always show mods), and generally select the appropriate weights.
Personal opinion, but I believe most of the participants take the class to just get fitter and look more toned. Body Pump is great for that. Some may be at the same weights for a while and just do it to maintain and not push (believe me, I try to get the effort level up); others do continue to increase their weights over time if they are really working hard. Most are NOT looking for muscle hypertrophy.

I say go with what works for each person! I am not a power lifter and never care to be. This seems to be the case for most of my participants. They ARE gaining endurance and some strength, along with getting the tone they are looking for.

WalkingAlong

Thanks, mllemusiq. I agree.

I know I'm beating a dead horse and many people who scoff at it here will probably always. But at least maybe some readers might draw their own conclusions from seeing some varying opinions.

I feel like the people who've done the class will know from how they feel the next day that it's not really like using an elliptical, too.

ninerbuff

So do you agree/disagree with journals of study that reps over 12+ are more slated to use of slow twitch muscles? And if you do agree, then you also should agree that this type of training is more "muscular endurance" focused rather than strength?

I will take your word on that. My issue is just that when people ask if it's a good way to include weights initially because they already do it and enjoy it, I don't think half the forum (having any knowledge of the class or not) should recite, "It's not 'lifting', it's cardio."

Maybe a better response would be more on the lines of, "It can be a good starting point and does have benefits for muscles including endurance and some strength increase initially. But many should eventually consider low rep lifting, especially if maximizing strength or hypertrophy is their goal."

When they see you're a moderator and have that six-line signature (do you paste that in each post?) and regular posters repeat what you say, I think it discourages people from doing the class. Maybe that is your goal, I don't know. I think most of them don't move to the weight floor, I think they're more likely to say "forget it, that's too intimidating so forget weights in my life."

At the gym where you taught, was the class mostly (more than half) slim, under-25 women and overweight, over-60 women like it is here? I think those two groups probably get a lot of benefit from the class and are also the least likely to feel comfortable lifting free weights in a gym on their own. I think the OP here is in the first group, if I recall right.

Nah, I'd NEVER discourage anyone from any type of physical movement to improve themselves. Walking is great exercise and for many all they can do. But it's not strength training and I'm sure that everyone here would agree on that.
The debate has been "Is BP strength training?" It's not. With the exception of initial strength improvement for a newbie to the class, the class itself isn't parlayed around actual progressive strength improvement. That's the correct information on it. I don't believe it's correct to misname a program of fitness when it doesn't fit the criteria.

As for the people who attend classes at my gym, it's a mixture. Most of the class are females and range from the age of 20's to 60's. More of the older crowd in the morning and younger in the evenings.

A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

contingencyplan

So do you agree/disagree with journals of study that reps over 12+ are more slated to use of slow twitch muscles? And if you do agree, then you also should agree that this type of training is more "muscular endurance" focused rather than strength?

I will take your word on that. My issue is just that when people ask if it's a good way to include weights initially because they already do it and enjoy it, I don't think half the forum (having any knowledge of the class or not) should recite, "It's not 'lifting', it's cardio."

Maybe a better response would be more on the lines of, "It can be a good starting point and does have benefits for muscles including endurance and some strength increase initially. But many should eventually consider low rep lifting, especially if maximizing strength or hypertrophy is their goal."

When they see you're a moderator and have that six-line signature (do you paste that in each post?) and regular posters repeat what you say, I think it discourages people from doing the class. Maybe that is your goal, I don't know. I think most of them don't move to the weight floor, I think they're more likely to say "forget it, that's too intimidating so forget weights in my life."

At the gym where you taught, was the class mostly (more than half) slim, under-25 women and overweight, over-60 women like it is here? I think those two groups probably get a lot of benefit from the class and are also the least likely to feel comfortable lifting free weights in a gym on their own. I think the OP here is in the first group, if I recall right.

Nah, I'd NEVER discourage anyone from any type of physical movement to improve themselves. Walking is great exercise and for many all they can do. But it's not strength training and I'm sure that everyone here would agree on that.
The debate has been "Is BP strength training?" It's not. With the exception of initial strength improvement for a newbie to the class, the class itself isn't parlayed around actual progressive strength improvement. That's the correct information on it. I don't believe it's correct to misname a program of fitness when it doesn't fit the criteria.

As for the people who attend classes at my gym, it's a mixture. Most of the class are females and range from the age of 20's to 60's. More of the older crowd in the morning and younger in the evenings.

A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

I think a big part of it is that women generally favor a more social setting (hence group classes) as well as a greater variety in movement (hence more choreography-intensive workout). Strength workouts typically utilize equipment you can't realistically use in a group class setting and consist of relatively few exercises done in too repetitive a fashion.

ninerbuff

So do you agree/disagree with journals of study that reps over 12+ are more slated to use of slow twitch muscles? And if you do agree, then you also should agree that this type of training is more "muscular endurance" focused rather than strength?

I will take your word on that. My issue is just that when people ask if it's a good way to include weights initially because they already do it and enjoy it, I don't think half the forum (having any knowledge of the class or not) should recite, "It's not 'lifting', it's cardio."

Maybe a better response would be more on the lines of, "It can be a good starting point and does have benefits for muscles including endurance and some strength increase initially. But many should eventually consider low rep lifting, especially if maximizing strength or hypertrophy is their goal."

When they see you're a moderator and have that six-line signature (do you paste that in each post?) and regular posters repeat what you say, I think it discourages people from doing the class. Maybe that is your goal, I don't know. I think most of them don't move to the weight floor, I think they're more likely to say "forget it, that's too intimidating so forget weights in my life."

At the gym where you taught, was the class mostly (more than half) slim, under-25 women and overweight, over-60 women like it is here? I think those two groups probably get a lot of benefit from the class and are also the least likely to feel comfortable lifting free weights in a gym on their own. I think the OP here is in the first group, if I recall right.

Nah, I'd NEVER discourage anyone from any type of physical movement to improve themselves. Walking is great exercise and for many all they can do. But it's not strength training and I'm sure that everyone here would agree on that.
The debate has been "Is BP strength training?" It's not. With the exception of initial strength improvement for a newbie to the class, the class itself isn't parlayed around actual progressive strength improvement. That's the correct information on it. I don't believe it's correct to misname a program of fitness when it doesn't fit the criteria.

As for the people who attend classes at my gym, it's a mixture. Most of the class are females and range from the age of 20's to 60's. More of the older crowd in the morning and younger in the evenings.

A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

I think a big part of it is that women generally favor a more social setting (hence group classes) as well as a greater variety in movement (hence more choreography-intensive workout). Strength workouts typically utilize equipment you can't realistically use in a group class setting and consist of relatively few exercises done in too repetitive a fashion.

That's somewhat true. I teach a "Straight up strength" group fitness class 2 times a week and urge everyone to use as much weight as possible for 10 reps for each exercise. Being well versed in exercise, I'm able to mix it up quite well. But unlike other lifting classes, I'm strategic in the sequencing, so we usually "strip off" weights towards the end of the class. I ALWAYS start with the big muscles first, then end with the small muscles last. This reduces the time for weight changing. And for things like push ups, I encourage everyone to just try to do "on toes" pushups with as many as they can. If the push up is easy for ten, then I change the angle or have them pair up and put plates on each others backs.

A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

WalkingAlong

I think a big part of it is that women generally favor a more social setting (hence group classes) as well as a greater variety in movement (hence more choreography-intensive workout). Strength workouts typically utilize equipment you can't realistically use in a group class setting and consist of relatively few exercises done in too repetitive a fashion.

"Too repetitive" sounds exactly like BodyPump. LOL. They use relatively few exercises, too, so it's very repetitive. And it is barbells. And the most difficult 'choreography' would be something like 'deadlift-row-deadlift'.

I think a lot of people like the music, too. And just being led.

Ninerbuff- I think it is probably discouraging people from doing BodyPump when everyone says "it's cardio", period. I would think, "Why would I waste my time with all those painful chest and shoulder presses and pushups and deadlifts and all that if I can get the same benefits from a treadmill?" To me, it just seems like it's treated like it's analogous to doing 3lb. curls while walking around the neighborhood. "Sorry, what you're doing is no good for what you're intending to improve." KWIM?

ninerbuff

I think a big part of it is that women generally favor a more social setting (hence group classes) as well as a greater variety in movement (hence more choreography-intensive workout). Strength workouts typically utilize equipment you can't realistically use in a group class setting and consist of relatively few exercises done in too repetitive a fashion.

"Too repetitive" sounds exactly like BodyPump. LOL. They use relatively few exercises, too, so it's very repetitive.

I think a lot of people like the music, too. And just being led.

Ninerbuff- I think it is probably discouraging people from doing BodyPump when everyone says "it's cardio", period. I would think, "Why would I waste my time with all those painful chest and shoulder presses and pushups and deadlifts and all that if I can get the same benefits from a treadmill?" To me, it just seems like it's treated like it's analogous to doing 3lb. curls while walking around the neighborhood. "Sorry, what you're doing is no good for what you're intending to improve." KWIM?

Well to say it's strictly cardio would be incorrect too. I get that some people don't want to lift heavy nor do they want to add any lean muscle (which doesn't happen with BP with anyone in my experience), so BP may be a good option for them. Also a great option to get an introduction into weight training. People that get discouraged are going to be people who are insecure about trying new exercise programs in most cases regardless of the programs. People are creatures of habit and when some different comes along, most people get concerned.

A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

WalkingAlong

:happy: :drinker: :happy:

Jasdramaqueen

Thank you everyone for your informed posts. I was perhaps using strength and conditioning interchangably.

There has been a lot of comments along the lines of 'lift heavy but less reps.' Given my lame-o arms, I will have to start low and work up to lifting heavy but I think I will continue with the BP classes, at least 1 a week.

There is a tendency on MFP to look down on cardio freaks but for a year, all I did was 3 spin classes a week and I lost 17lb without even trying. I admit though, although I was toned, I wasn't strong. Now, I'm not bothered about being able to move mountains, I just want to be fit and healthy. So I think I'll mix it up and let you know if I see any results from Stronglifts 5 x 5 in 6-12 weeks!

contingencyplan

Thank you everyone for your informed posts. I was perhaps using strength and conditioning interchangably.

There has been a lot of comments along the lines of 'lift heavy but less reps.' Given my lame-o arms, I will have to start low and work up to lifting heavy but I think I will continue with the BP classes, at least 1 a week.

There is a tendency on MFP to look down on cardio freaks but for a year, all I did was 3 spin classes a week and I lost 17lb without even trying. I admit though, although I was toned, I wasn't strong. Now, I'm not bothered about being able to move mountains, I just want to be fit and healthy. So I think I'll mix it up and let you know if I see any results from Stronglifts 5 x 5 in 6-12 weeks!

Heavy is subjective. It's based on rep ranges, not on poundages. If your muscles completely give out on you after only a single digit number of reps, you're lifting heavy. Doesn't matter if that's 2 lbs, 20 lbs, or 200 lbs.

When you start with Stronglifts you won't be able to mix it up with BP classes anymore. The program requires taking ACTUAL rest days after your lifting days. Mixing SL up with other higher intensity forms of exercise is a recipe for disaster, especially as a beginner.

ninerbuff

Heavy is subjective. It's based on rep ranges, not on poundages. If your muscles completely give out on you after only a single digit number of reps, you're lifting heavy. Doesn't matter if that's 2 lbs, 20 lbs, or 200 lbs.

Lol, I'll agree with this, but sometimes the subjectivity can be overcome with common sense. I had a female client once (well over 200lbs at 5'6") whine about lifting 5lbs weights, yet she would walk in carrying in and out a 15lb daughter with ease. Sometimes one does need to "call out" those who dramatize how "heavy" those 2lbs dumbells are on some exercises like curls.

A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

WalkingAlong

SL doesn't even want you to do cardio on rest days?