Strength & Conditioning >> Lifting weights for 12 year old?
| 10/3/12 2:49 AM | |
Chocolate Shatner
34
Member Since: 1/1/01 Posts: 31851 |
Squatdog - Back on the shelf? riiiight. I'm sure the shelf was "in the closet" as well. |
| 10/3/12 2:53 AM | |
Chocolate Shatner
34
Member Since: 1/1/01 Posts: 31852 |
oh, BTW, for those trying to find the studies about children and weightlifting, here's the NY Times article: http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/24/phys-ed-the-benefits-of-weight-training-for-kids/ There's a few links in there, from those who show that kids don't get injured, to those that show that in fact resistance training for kids actually decreases chance of injury. |
| 10/3/12 3:14 AM | |
|
Spartan79
Member Since: 1/1/11 Posts: 663 |
Leigh - Well, he says specifically that he wants to bulk up. Bodyweight exercises will not do that. Don't you remember being fed that lie as a kid? "Weights will make you slow. Stick to push ups and pull ups." Yeah except I could do over 20 pull ups and 50 pushups when I was 12, plus probably a thousand squats. Funnily enough, I was still very small.I asked so you want to bulk??? Then this was the reply .
|
| 10/3/12 3:14 AM | |
|
Spartan79
Member Since: 1/1/11 Posts: 664 |
MattB ATC - GSDFan,Read posts mate ;-)
|
| 10/3/12 3:30 AM | |
|
Spartan79
Member Since: 1/1/11 Posts: 665 |
Spartan started his argument stating his opposition to weight training, and then his focused changed to "bulk", which I am assuming he did after he realized that his argument against a youth weight training was lacking. Wrong! Read posts . Focused changed to Bulk after I asked so you want to Bulk the kid and was told yes. Question: if you don't want to bulk why not just use Bodyweight to strengthen the Body? Or can you not strengthen the body from Bodyweight exercises ? It's just been my option from the start. Nothing more. Then all the buddies start coming out with ridiculous statements about things they have no clue. Or just don't read the whole thread and try to make out I've said things I've not just because I disagreed with their buddy Lol! Enough said on this , I wish the dad and his boy well.
|
| 10/3/12 3:54 AM | |
Leigh
320
Member Since: 1/1/01 Posts: 30377 |
No, asking a question to clarify means you're a flid dick head spec savers. Just go home. You're an uneducated turd who has no clue on how to analyse. Go back to getting your information from myths and old wives' tales. Here is some free workout advice - getting squatting to help with your jumping.......to incorrect conclusions.
|
| 10/3/12 6:19 AM | |
Squatdog
54
Member Since: 1/1/01 Posts: 41456 |
Chocolate Shatner -Squatdog - Back on the shelf? I thought fat people were supposed to be jolly?
This. There's nothing wrong with moderate weight-training for a 12-year old and the only people saying different are parroting a mixture of ignorance and bro science. |
| 10/3/12 3:11 PM | |
Bull_in_chinashop
16
Member Since: 1/1/01 Posts: 39467 |
Just happened to be surfing Reddit and I stumbled across this quote from Mark Rippetoe "Kids can lift safely at any age if technique is correct, and has been addressed in all of my books. I feel that childhood should be enjoyed, and a father that forces a kid to lift weights is as bad as a father that forces a kid to play football. Children are not here for us to live vicariously through. Let them train if they perceive it as fun, and make them do the movements correctly. When they want to stop, let them stop." |
| 10/3/12 4:51 PM | |
None So Blind
92
Member Since: 1/1/01 Posts: 14549 |
Weights hurt kids and slow their development? I wonder where they get all those 6'7 350 pound Nebraska linemen that have been baling hay and other unbelievably rigorous shit on the farm since age 4 :-P And to clarify Rip's quote above - he means LITTLE kids, like 8 or 9 - if you're 14 or so and trying for junior varsity football, go nuts on the weights. Here's his quote from the book: A whole lot of people are under the erroneous impression that weight training is harmful for younger athletes, specifically the pre-pubescent population. Pediatricians are a wonderful group of people on the whole, but very often they are woefully uninformed regarding the data pertaining to the injury rates of various sports activities. They are also reluctant to apply some basic logic to an analysis of those numbers. The table below lists the injury rates of various sports. Note that organized weightlifting activities, at 0.0012 injuries per 100 participation hours is about 5100 times safer than everyone's favorite organized children's sport, soccer, at 6.2 injuries per 100 player hours. Gym class, at 0.18, is more dangerous than supervised weight training. Yet even at this late date it is common for medical professionals to advise against weight training for kids. The most cursory glance at the actual data renders this recommendation foolishness. So why does this mythology persist, and how did it get started? Most often cited as the primary concern is the chance of epiphyseal, or growth plate, fracture, leading to growth asymmetry in the affected appendage. The entire body of the sports medicine literature contains six reports of growth plate fracture in kids associated with weight training, none of which was specific enough in detail to determine whether the injury occurred under the bar (or if there even was a bar), if it occurred as the result of a fall due to faulty technique or improper instruction, or as the result of injudicious loading. And even in these six isolated examples, not one subsequently displayed any long-term effects that would indicate that a growth plate injury does not heal just like any other injury. The most intensely lame argument of all is that weight training stunts a kid's growth. But hauling hay does not? Such nonsense is not really worthy of response. Here's the bottom line: weight training is precisely scalable to the ability of the individual lifter Soccer is not. We have 11 lb. bars - or even broomsticks - for kids to start lifting with, but a full-speed collision on the field with another 80 lb. kid is an inherently unscalable event. This logic also applies to every group of people that might be viewed as a "special population" - the frail elderly, people with skeletal and muscular disease, the completely sedentary, the morbidly obese, and the lazy (sorry, couldn't resist). Note that women are not listed as a special population: they are half of the population. Anyone who claims that women are sufficiently different in terms of physiologic response to exercise that the principles of basic barbell training do not apply to them is thinking either irrationally or commercially. In fact, the adaptation to weight training is precisely the adaptation that these special populations need, and unless they are also cardiac patients aerobic-type long slow distance exercise is only a tiny bit more useful than playing chess. |
Reply Post
You must log in to post a reply. Click here to login.




