CrossFit Put To The Test, Comes Out On Top: Study

Options
13567

Replies

  • PRMinx
    PRMinx Posts: 4,585 Member
    Options
    There's no point in "hating" on CF. It's at its peak popularity right now, three years from now half the studios will be closed as the exercise world moves on to the next big thing.

    Meantime, those who enjoy should keep enjoying it! Any exercise is better than no exercise, in my book. :smile:

    :flowerforyou:
  • mbcieslak87
    mbcieslak87 Posts: 206 Member
    Options
    [
    How come you said cross fit came out on top when the study didn't have the subjects do anything but crossfit workouts?

    That was the title of the article in the Huffington post.

    Well, consider the source … ? :tongue:



    THANK YOU! Clearly everyone is failing to remember this flawless public health study is brought to us by none other than The Huffington Post... who also reported that Romney won the last presidential election, among thousands of other completely fallacious articles! Whenever Huffington Post is the top reference on an article, it's tough to believe anything it says!

    That being said, I have nothing against CrossFit, except those I know who do it tend to be obnoxious, shoving it down the rest of our throats on their facebook page in "I know how to workout better than you"-esque posts. I completely believe it is a valid and worthy form of exercise and I myself do many similar exercises... yet having a Master's Degree in Public Health and knowing the Huffington Post to be the most horrid example of awful reporting - I can't take this article seriously!
  • brraanndi
    brraanndi Posts: 325 Member
    Options
    Crossfit is awesome. IMHO, it's far better than the hand full of regular gyms I've ever been to and the level of instruction blows away any regular gym's personal trainers that I've seen.

    Again, just my 2 cents based on what I've seen. No offense to actual personal trainers who don't spend the whole session texting and chatting when your client isn't even breaking a sweat. But I sure have seen a lot of that going on.

    Go crossfit !!!

    I think my head would explode if I paid someone to stand around and text by me.
  • raw_meal
    raw_meal Posts: 96 Member
    Options
    “This is not the workout for a 45-year-old person with multiple cardiovascular risk factors. People absolutely need to be properly screened before beginning CrossFit.”

    Translation - CrossFit is great for people who already have a high degree of cardiovascular fitness.

    Just a disclaimer, this guy is just warning you that you are going to some hard work and you may die if you don't regulate your workout. Just like anything else. Don't let it scare you.
  • raw_meal
    raw_meal Posts: 96 Member
    Options
    [
    How come you said cross fit came out on top when the study didn't have the subjects do anything but crossfit workouts?

    That was the title of the article in the Huffington post.

    Well, consider the source … ? :tongue:



    THANK YOU! Clearly everyone is failing to remember this flawless public health study is brought to us by none other than The Huffington Post... who also reported that Romney won the last presidential election, among thousands of other completely fallacious articles! Whenever Huffington Post is the top reference on an article, it's tough to believe anything it says!

    That being said, I have nothing against CrossFit, except those I know who do it tend to be obnoxious, shoving it down the rest of our throats on their facebook page in "I know how to workout better than you"-esque posts. I completely believe it is a valid and worthy form of exercise and I myself do many similar exercises... yet having a Master's Degree in Public Health and knowing the Huffington Post to be the most horrid example of awful reporting - I can't take this article seriously!

    Huffington is re posting someone else's article (American Council on Exercise). Agree that their some of their original reporting is suspect. See the negative articles published on crossfit by one of their so called medical hacks( see Crossfits dirty Secret also posted on the HP).
  • melham
    melham Posts: 233 Member
    Options
    I tried it and stopped after a few sessions. I was already pretty fit when I started, so it wasn't a matter of it being too hard. My issue with it was that the only thing they cared about was speed. Zero interest in form. As long as you were more or less throwing the kettle bell around in the right general direction, or jumping up and then laying on the floor repeatedly fast enough, that's all that mattered. I'm not hating on it, just throwing my 2 cents in FWIW. I'm glad it works for so many folks, but it's not the right program for me.
  • SoLongAndThanksForAllTheFish
    SoLongAndThanksForAllTheFish Posts: 831 Member
    Options
    Well, thats a bunch of misleading baloney and non-science. Statements about this study are all BS, all the study shows is elevated HR and increased calorie burning after two different Crossfit routines, only, thats it and for added effect: durrr? What would you expect after exercise...? And you cant say it "comes out on top" when you compared to nothing. Crossfit is great if you dont take it to extremes...as is any other exercise program really.

    I'll do an equally valid claim as your study now, to show how ridiculous it is: My lunch comes out on top! Because well...it was comprised of calories and my hunger went down and well... its what I ate...
  • raw_meal
    raw_meal Posts: 96 Member
    Options
    [
    How come you said cross fit came out on top when the study didn't have the subjects do anything but crossfit workouts?

    That was the title of the article in the Huffington post.

    Well, consider the source … ? :tongue:



    THANK YOU! Clearly everyone is failing to remember this flawless public health study is brought to us by none other than The Huffington Post... who also reported that Romney won the last presidential election, among thousands of other completely fallacious articles! Whenever Huffington Post is the top reference on an article, it's tough to believe anything it says!

    That being said, I have nothing against CrossFit, except those I know who do it tend to be obnoxious, shoving it down the rest of our throats on their facebook page in "I know how to workout better than you"-esque posts. I completely believe it is a valid and worthy form of exercise and I myself do many similar exercises... yet having a Master's Degree in Public Health and knowing the Huffington Post to be the most horrid example of awful reporting - I can't take this article seriously!

    The original study was done by the American Council on Exercise

    https://www.acefitness.org/prosourcearticle/3542/crossfit-sup-tm-sup-new-research-puts-popular/
  • MyPureSteez
    MyPureSteez Posts: 265 Member
    Options
    if something works (for you) you don't have to try and proclaim it as king. Just let it work for you and others will catch on if it really is that good.
  • raw_meal
    raw_meal Posts: 96 Member
    Options
    Well, thats a bunch of misleading baloney and non-science. Statements about this study are all BS, all the study shows is elevated HR and increased calorie burning after two different Crossfit routines, only, thats it and for added effect: durrr? What would you expect after exercise...? And you cant say it "comes out on top" when you compared to nothing. Crossfit is great if you dont take it to extremes...as is any other exercise program really.

    I'll do an equally valid claim as your study now, to show how ridiculous it is: My lunch comes out on top! Because well...it was comprised of calories and my hunger went down and well... its what I ate...

    It's just a study reproving that HIT is effective and CF is HIT. There's many studies on HIT.
  • lilawolf
    lilawolf Posts: 1,690 Member
    Options
    I say if you haven't tried it, you can't and shouldn't criticize it

    Off topic, but this is way annoying. I have not eating a dog poop sandwich, but I can and should criticize it. This should read: If you don't know the research behind it/what goes on during it/etc you can't and shouldn't criticize it
  • Ichigo2012
    Ichigo2012 Posts: 31 Member
    Options
    I tried it and stopped after a few sessions. I was already pretty fit when I started, so it wasn't a matter of it being too hard. My issue with it was that the only thing they cared about was speed. Zero interest in form. As long as you were more or less throwing the kettle bell around in the right general direction, or jumping up and then laying on the floor repeatedly fast enough, that's all that mattered. I'm not hating on it, just throwing my 2 cents in FWIW. I'm glad it works for so many folks, but it's not the right program for me.

    Sounds like bad coaching, which you can get anywhere, in any sport. Maybe you'd like it if you try another box.
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    Options
    So you are saying HIT does not work?

    The post you are replying to didn't say anything even remotely like that.
  • JNick77
    JNick77 Posts: 3,783 Member
    Options
    Better than what? I'm not going to "knock" CF because if you have a good coach it's just fine. It's no worse than clueless idiots that attempt to lift weights at a regular gym. I'm saying that as somebody that has no interest in CF. Bottom line, why care about calorie burn? Most of your weight/fat loss is going to come from a healthy calorie deficit so in other words, your diet. If your diet sucks then it doesn't matter how many calories you burn while exercising. Too many calories and you can put on weight, too few calories and you'll burn yourself out and you won't be exercising anymore. Pick the type of exercise you enjoy that helps you meet your fitness goals and stop worrying about crap like calorie burn. The whole CF versus PL versus marathon running, versus exercise calories burned from vacuuming your floors is just stupid.
  • kevie1021
    kevie1021 Posts: 543 Member
    Options
    Better than what? I'm not going to "knock" CF because if you have a good coach it's just fine. It's no worse than clueless idiots that attempt to lift weights at a regular gym. I'm saying that as somebody that has no interest in CF. Bottom line, why care about calorie burn? Most of your weight/fat loss is going to come from a healthy calorie deficit so in other words, your diet. If your diet sucks then it doesn't matter how many calories you burn while exercising. Too many calories and you can put on weight, too few calories and you'll burn yourself out and you won't be exercising anymore. Pick the type of exercise you enjoy that helps you meet your fitness goals and stop worrying about crap like calorie burn. The whole CF versus PL versus marathon running, versus exercise calories burned from vacuuming your floors is just stupid.

    Amen!
  • Hornsby
    Hornsby Posts: 10,322 Member
    Options
    crossfit-fat-kid-meme-generator-he-asked-do-i-even-lift-i-asked-him-does-he-even-crossfit-cc9f01.jpg?1321862078.jpg
  • SkinnyFatAlbert
    SkinnyFatAlbert Posts: 482 Member
    Options
    Nah, light cleaning and dog walking is where it's at.
  • Capt_Apollo
    Capt_Apollo Posts: 9,026 Member
    Options
    314x314px-LL-2f8f2271_crossfit.gif
  • MarioLozano16
    MarioLozano16 Posts: 319 Member
    Options
    On top for rotator cuff injuries
  • SoLongAndThanksForAllTheFish
    SoLongAndThanksForAllTheFish Posts: 831 Member
    Options
    Well, thats a bunch of misleading baloney and non-science. Statements about this study are all BS, all the study shows is elevated HR and increased calorie burning after two different Crossfit routines, only, thats it and for added effect: durrr? What would you expect after exercise...? And you cant say it "comes out on top" when you compared to nothing. Crossfit is great if you dont take it to extremes...as is any other exercise program really.

    I'll do an equally valid claim as your study now, to show how ridiculous it is: My lunch comes out on top! Because well...it was comprised of calories and my hunger went down and well... its what I ate...

    So you are saying HIT does not work? It's just a study reproving that HIT is effective and CF is HIT. There's many studies on HIT.

    No, thats not what I said, and its also not what the "study" said. All the "study" says is Crossfit elevates calorie burning and elevates HR. My issue is with making these very poorly done studies of a tiny group of samples into something they arent and basically lying with titles of articles about them. Its bad for real science. Its bad for what you are falsely promoting. And its not true. So, yes Crossfit can work great for you, it does elevate calorie burning and HR. Is it "shown to come out on top"? Not in any way. It just makes me annoyed at Crossfit and tend to think "what other misinformation is being promoted?".

    For something to be "on top" it must be compared to other things. You might be able to say one of those routines is "on top" of the other, but since nothing else was compared, thats all you can say. So Crossfit is on top of itself is all you could claim.

    Sitting upright in the couch is on top of other forms of sitting because I measured calorie burns of laying in the couch vs sitting upright! Now I want to post "Sitting Upright Comes Out on Top, Study Shows!" in an article.

    My study showed that my lunch provided calories, and I was hungry, now I'm not (measure of provided calories) so my lunch was on top of all other lunches! Also equally as valid. Now don't these two claims seem pretty ridiculous to say?

Categories